Freemasonry and the Protestant Thought a STUDY on THEIR COMMON HISTORY of SIMILARITIES and DIFFERENCES

Freemasonry and the Protestant Thought A STUDY ON THEIR COMMON HISTORY OF SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES

Oleksii Krykunov BONN 2021 1

FREEMASONRY AN THE PROTESTANT THOUGHT: A STUDY ON THEIR COMMON HISTORY OF SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES

Oleksii Krykunov BONN 2021 2

This work is discussing one of the most peculiar subjects in history, Freemasonry. Given study’s focus is directed to a special relationship between the Protestant denomination and Freemasonry. The work analyses how did these two concepts were able to co-exist for many centuries without going into an open conflict, even though their compatibility is not always presented due to many differences. Basically, the whole book is discussing their differences and similarities from the historical point of view, while paying a lot of attention to origins.

Contents

Introduction…………….4

Historical Setting………………..8

Reformation in Britain, Humanism and Guilds in England……………….20

Origins of Freemasonry and the Age of Reason…………26

Parliament, Protestantism and Freemasonry ………………35

James Anderson and Other Famous and Influential Early Freemasons……………..39

Early Freemasonry in France, the Netherlands, Germany, and Scandinavia……………49 North America……………66

Catholicism and Freemasonry…………..72

Freemasonry and Protestantism Today…………….78

Conclusion…………….84

Bibliography……………87

Introduction

This relatively new and short study is going to discuss the position of Freemasonry in the Protestant countries, particularly Great Britain and further on the United States; how did both parties connect, what was their relationship and how did the latter tolerate Freemasonry? The Reformation gave birth and later raised many revolutionary ideas and supposedly Freemasonry is in one way or another was related to the process. Wars of religion, political divisions, and intrigues between the royal courts of Europe were taking people in different and hostile directions. All of it was the intricate part of the day and history, when the society of Freemasons was taking its first steps in England and Europe. The following work is going to be based on the following ideas and concepts that construct its main thesis. The ideas of Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, and humanism became the alternative to a lot of sectarian and political violence, and yet again Freemasonry was having its origins in those turbulent days. Freemasonry and the Protestant Reformation were related in time and co-existed geographically, thus, the given work is analyzing the relationship between them. The Reformation was eventually followed by the degree of pluralism, and therefore, the fraternity of Freemasons in the Protestant England [Britain]. This society was either tolerated by the Protestant states or spread through the representatives from there such as Duke of Wharton.

The medieval guilds and builder’s fraternities have been standing as the precursor to the foundations of Freemasonry in England and other European countries. Their history will be discussed in order to show the whole picture. Later it is well-documented origin [1717] is located in the Protestant countries, Anglican England and Presbyterian Scotland, the fact which may be seen as the cornerstone of the given work, and will be traced back to it throughout the study.

It has been known to nearly everyone that the origin of modern Freemasonry goes back to England. This country managed to provide the beginning of its most important traditions, the majority of the rituals were developed there and particularly the country procured enough safety, so early Lodges could establish themselves without constantly looking over the shoulder. Religious tolerance was on the rise in England after the so-called “glorious revolution of 1688”, the country was moving toward more changes, and the period particularly coincided with the formation of Freemasonry.1 King James II, a Catholic son of Charles I, was removed and newly established monarchs William and Mary have acquired the throne, who both were Protestants. A Bill of Rights that followed, gave protection to previously rebellious Protestant groups, but not to Catholics or atheists: in Freemasonry atheists are excluded too.2 Catholicism was still seen as a foreign influence in England and was not tolerated. At that particular time it became very obvious that the majority of people became increasingly tired of the religious wars of the past [English Civil War, Catholics or Anglicans vs. Puritans], the need for toleration was

1 Sarah Frahm, The Cross and the Compass: Freemasonry and Religious Tolerance in Mexico, (Palibrio, 2014) at p. 11. 2 Ibid., p 11. 5

in the air.3 The prominent contemporary English philosopher and political thinker, John Locke was picturing his ideas based on tolerance and faith, excluding atheism or fanaticism of any kind. The belief was necessary, disbelief was not accepted, but people had a right to join any church, something quite new for that age.4 This notion reminds the concepts, later established in the Freemason’s Constitution written by James Anderson, a Presbyterian [Scottish version of Calvinism] pastor and a lawyer. All early English Freemasons were Protestants, born in the officially Protestant country. Modern ideas of tolerance in England coincided with the establishment of Freemasonry in time and simultaneously became intertwined with the progressive and cutting-edge ideas such as Deism. Matthew Tindal and John Toland, Unitarian theologians [rejecting the Trinity concept], born as Protestants, and later well-known deists made a profound influence on Freemasonry.5 Tindal focused upon the idea that there must be a religion upon which everyone will agree, some sort of concept that shall not divide people, but get them together.

I am so far from thinking the maxims of Confucius and Jesus Christ to differ; that I think the plain and simple maxims of the former will help to illustrate the more obscure ones of the latter.6

This is the pivotal point in which the idea of Freemasonry was getting born, many new ideas were chatted among the educated classes, it was the end of the seventeenth century, soon after the Glorious Revolution of 1688, and probably the final victory of the Protestant monarchy in England. Such works of Matthew Tindal as Letter to the Reverend the Clergy (1694) and Reflections on […] the Doctrine of the Trinity (1695), a Protestant [liberal Anglican?], who became the outright deist and natural philosopher, turned to be important in the formation of the future tolerant and innovative thinking, an essential part of the Freemasonic tradition. Religion of the country was tolerated with the natural, deistic concept of the Grand Architect in the lodge, something that reflected Tindal’s ideas on the natural religion.7 Another important thinker of the era John Toland [Irish by birth] was also a follower of deism, and an author of Panthesticon and Christianity Not Mysterious (1696). Particularly after his studies in Edinburgh [mostly Presbyterian city by that time], he became possibly involved in some secret societies that could predate Freemasonry or student fraternities.8 This interesting mix of the newly established relative tolerance in the officially Protestant country and progressive ideas of the day gave birth to the well-known English Enlightenment.

Previously mentioned James Anderson, an author of the first known Freemasons Constitution [1723] was a Presbyterian pastor, or minister of the Scots Church in Westminster to be more specific. He is also not so well known for his book called, Royal Genealogies Or

3 S.G. Hefelbower, The Relation of John Locke to English Deism, (Chicago, 1918) at pp. 4-5. 4 Frahm, The Cross and the Compass, at p. 12. 5 Douglas Knoop and G. P. Jones, Freemasonry and the Idea of Natural Religion, (London, Printed for private circulation, 1942) at pp. 42-43. 6 Matthew Tindal, Christianity As Old as the Creation: Or, The Gospel, a Republication of the Religion of Nature, (Adegi Graphics LLC, 1999) at pp. 77, 341-342, 396-398. 7 Douglas Knopp, The Genesis of Freemasonry, An Account of the Rise and Development of Freemasonry in Its Operative, Accepted, and Early Speculative Phases, (Q.C. Correspondence Circle, 1978) at p. 257. 8 Margaret C. Jacob, The Radical Enlightenment: Pantheists, Freemasons and Republicans, (Cornerstone Book, 2006) at pp. 153-154. 6

the Genealogical Tables of Emperors, Kings and Princes, published by Bettenham in 1732. His Constitution is the blueprint of the speculative Freemasons until today, and his figure is seen as one of the most influential in Freemasonry that has shaped this organization.9 He is probably one of the most, if not the most important examples of the connection between Protestant representation in the construction of Freemasonry and its later existence. The whole story did not end in England, the Freemasonry continued to grow faster in the Protestant countries than in any other country where Reformation did not take place. Founding Fathers of the United States such as George Washington and Benjamin Franklin were Freemasons and Protestants. George Washington was often suspected for his deistic position, which he could have kept secret.10 In France where Protestants [Huguenots] were not well tolerated well until the French Revolution of 1789, so the best place for them to be truly equal to others, express their views or criticize the Roman Catholic Church was the Freemason’s Lodge.11 The expression used by Freemasons, “to be on the level” ardently applied to many Protestant Freemasons in France, where the religious tolerance was slowed down by the absolute monarchy and the Catholic Church [Gallican]. One of the infamous reformers in Freemasonry [seen as a rebel in the Regular Masonic organizations until today] Frederic Desmons was a Protestant minister, who promoted significant changes to the General Regulations [Statute] of the Grand Orient de France in 1877.12

So far the discussion touched merely similarities or parallels between Freemasonry and Protestantism, however, to keep the analytical pace it should be noted that they share many differences, among which the most important one is the factor of religion itself. Freemasonry has never claimed to be the religion, when on the other hand Protestantism is one of the branches of Christianity consisting of many denominations. As Lynn Dumenil noted in his book, Freemasonry and American Culture, 1880 - 1930, that Freemasons could have identified their organization with Protestantism, but were not to exhort the religious system.13 Some Protestant organizations or churches, indeed, were not welcoming Freemasonry as their partner. In the United States, which is often seen to be the bastion of Freemasonry and deeply rooted Protestant foundations, there was the Anti-Masonic Party that was solidified just by one goal - to limit or destroy Freemasonry in America. Freemasons were accused of a murder of William Morgan on September 12, 1826, most likely self-claiming former Freemason, but certainly a stonemason known for his scandalous behavior, and threats to expose the secrets of Freemasons.14 There was no evidence, but the public picked the case up, and eventually, the whole agenda resulted in the creation of the Anti-Masonic Party. It was the only political party in American history, which was established for merely one goal and it happened to be directed

9 James Anderson, The Constitutions of the Free-masons: Containing the History, Charges, Regulations, &c. of that Most Ancient and Right Worshipful Fraternity. For the Use of the Lodges, (William Hunter, 1723). 10 Stephen J. Vicchio, George Washington’s Religion: The Faith of the First President, (Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2019) at p. 26. 11 Handbook on Freemasonry, an article by Guy Liagre, Protestantism and Freemasonry, (BRILL, 2014) at p. 165. 12 Frank Tallett, Nicholas Atkin, Religion, Society and Politics in France since 1789, (A&C Black, 1991) at p. 128. 13 Lynn Dumenil, Freemasonry and American Culture, 1880-1930, (Princeton University Press, 2014) at p. 125. 14 William Preston Vaughn, The Anti-Masonic Party in the United States: 1826-1843, (University Press of Kentucky, 2014) at p. 1. 7

against Freemasonry. It may not be thoroughly mentioned again that the United States and the state of New York, Batavia County where the affair took place, were mostly Protestant in the 1820s. During that time many Protestant Evangelicals in America began to experience the decline of their political power, for example, they could not stop the Sunday mail service; Freemasons were often accused in the esoteric, anti-Christian rituals, and generally, the fraternity was alleged in the “irreligious” behavior.15 In the Protestant England, not everything was tolerant, Samuel Prichard’s anti-Masonic pamphlet Masonry Dissected was published in 1730, in the British North American Colonies, the New York Gazette attacked the fraternity in 1737, and later after the American revolution, the Congregational clergy was accusing

Freemasons in anti-Christianity, Jeffersonian Republicanism, and threats to authority.16

The general conclusion may be that Freemasonry had factually originated in the Protestant world, did absorb its burst of inspiration, which had begun during the Reformation and caught all the lights of the age of English Enlightenment. However, the human nature of suspicion, intolerance, and an aggravating wish to blame someone else in their problems did take place in the Protestant countries, too. Human nature is not perfect and it must hold any scholar or student, who is interested in the relationship between the Freemasonry and Protestant Christian tradition from idealizing the position of Freemasonry in the Protestant world, even though it was far better than elsewhere. Freemasonry was always the organization that on one hand took the best from the Protestant thought and ideas that have developed in the Protestant countries, but at the same time could experience its religious sharp edges. First and foremost, the study must be objective and idealize neither side, especially when it comes to religious wars. This book is discussing the subject within the mainframe of time in which it was happening from the beginning of the 1500s and 1600s until Freemasonry as an organization was fully formed. It contains a lot of history and religious studies, which bring more understanding to the overall setting of the topic and help to open it up to the reader. Such terms as humanism, Enlightenment, religious wars, and Renaissance certainly appear in this work with the punctual precision to evaluate the time in which Freemasonry was born, what was its base and how it intervenes within the religious thinking, politics of the day, liberties or progress. Basically, it’s the free essay, which is meant to open a secret door into the well-known mystery.

15 Ibid, at p. 16. 16 Ibid, at pp. 12-13. 8

Historical Setting

Religious Conflict in Europe during the 1500s and 1600s

This article is going to describe the time context of the discussed period when Freemasonry began to establish itself in Britain. Interesting times give birth to personalities, organizations, or even new religions. The time which is going to be discussed is seriously important for world history, and not merely Britain but surely the Continental Europe, too. Surely, this century was an important continuation of the Renaissance, which was capable of changing Europe forever, brought light of newly re-discovered antiquity, and literally managed to form new elites with its own culture.17 This century was preceded by the century of Protestant Reformation, religious conflicts caused by the denominational split, previously impossible issues became radically possible. Something that was happening under Jan Hus or John Wyclif, Waldensians in the Swiss Alps and their martyrdom or Dante’s phenomenally talented, but still medieval worldview, had burst with revolutionary Luther and Calvin setting completely new horizons for the all European development, progress, but also tragedies of the ongoing divisions.18 This development meant no peace, further the disunity of Europe caused by the European religious wars, and staggering, absolutely awesome breakthroughs of humanist thought, absolutism, mercantilism, and literature. It was not directly imposed or encouraged by the Renaissance, however, was a quintessential part of the age.

Although the Renaissance did not trigger the religious revolutions and counter-revolutions, the major Protestant and Catholic apologists - including the key figures Martin Luther and John Calvin (1509-1564) - were trained humanists and the school and university carricula devised by reformers followed humanist principles. In the end, the central Renaissance intellectual phenomenon of humanism both powered the Reformations and assisted in their diffusion.19

This time which preceded the seventeenth century had continued in it, growing with more colors of quite dangerous, but innovative development. The word ‘humanist’ alone means an idea of bringing the Enlightenment, something centered upon civilization, studia humanitatis, pro-human thought, or better to say thinking on what can make a human being better, progress and education.20 the 1600s were directly continuing all the positive and negative issues associated with the changing European mindset, difficulties of growth, and setbacks caused by the conflicting nature of any new undertaking. Reformation itself indeed had divided Europe between the Protestants and Catholics before the 1600s and the rift was not overturned in any close proximity, the conflict between two parties was getting only stronger, taking more or redrawing borders.21 Eventually, the discussed age can be seen from the

17 Margaret L. King, The Renaissance in Europe, (Lawrence King Publishing, 2003) at p. 12. 18 Jan Bloemendal, Howard Norland, Neo-Latin Drama in Early Modern Europe, (BRILL, 2013) at p. 293. 19 Margaret L. King, The Renaissance in Europe. p. 12. 20 Mads L. Jensen, A Humanist in Reformation Politics: Philipp Melanchthon on Political Philosophy and Natural Law, (BRILL, 2019) at p. 51. 21 Eric Donald Hirsch, Joseph F. Kett, James S. Trefil, The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2002) at p. 202. 9

different points of view, to some it was the beginning of a new life, however, others still see it as the beginning of the division, which caused religious conflicts, and especially on the side of the Catholic critique, the beginning of major troubles for the Roman Catholic Church. Their critique is usually based on the very concept of religious wars that were to follow, the destruction of monasteries, confiscations of lands that belonged to the Church, overall violence, and weakening of morals brought by the very violence.22 Certainly, this view possesses a lot of truth because the whole nature of any religious conflict, which relates to the higher being whose existence cannot be proved empirically to any man on the street, always seemed to be ridiculous to any thinking mind or at least someone who opposes violence. Martin J. Spalding, the Archbishop of Baltimore back in the nineteenth century was looking at this situation from the Catholic position, the deist or an atheist would support the former sentence which contains the meaning that the very existence of this higher being cannot be proved empirically to everyone. Religion was the ideological frontline of the age, it was given excuses and predicaments to fulfill coffers with money, or take them away as it happened during the secularization of monasteries in England under Edward VIII and his loyal statesman Thomas Cromwell, the latter process required brutal force, and surely excluded humanist values, which both seemingly knew about.23 Religion had no excuses if it came to the judgments over who is right or wrong because certainly one or the other force had to be right in their mind and certainly could not give in unless being militarily defeated. Luther himself was often quoted as an example of such a pro-war unbinding position, who defended the so-called necessary violence.

Luther openly defended the violence by which the Catholic worship had been suppressed, and the monasteries seized upon and secularized. He was consulted on the subject and this was his reply: “It is said that no violence should be used for conscience’ sake; and not have yet our princes driven away the monks from their asylum? Yes: we must not oblige any one to believe our doctrine; we have never done violence to the consciences of others (!); but it would be a crime not to prevent our doctrine from being profaned. To remove scandal is not to force the conscience. I can not force a rouge to be honest, but I can prevent him from stealing. A prince cannot constrain a highway robber to confess the Lord, but yet he has a gallows for malefactors”.24

Such a critique brings the idea of who is right in such conflicts anyway and is there any saint who does not ask for the ‘righteous’ violence in the name of the faith once in a while? However, it was the situation of Europe at that time despite the humanist developments, early scientific discoveries, and art. Later on, it will be discussed that Freemasons often used the ‘chessboard’ as one of their most important symbols meaning the dark and enlightened world, good and evil. The world of the post-Renaissance age in which this society was born certainly included such a concept. Humanism and religious wars should not get along, but they did at that time and took a lot of lives and dignity with them. Germany as the country where the Reformation took hold the quickest was torn by the conflict, the Holy Roman emperor could often only in name dictate his proscripts or attempted to influence the deteriorating power of his vassals by manipulating them, while sometimes facing the common Ottoman threat,

22 Martin John Spalding, The History of the Protestant Reformation, (J. Murphy & Company, 1875) at p. 331. 23 A. Goodman, Angus Mackay, The Impact of Humanism on Western Europe During the Renaissance, (Routledge, 2014) at p. 270. 24 Martin John Spalding, The History of the Protestant Reformation, p. 333. 10

however, it did not bring the wished effect. The Peace of Nürnberg (1532) was merely a temporary measure, which did not change the overall situation but provided some seven years of relative stability.25 Unifying forces within the Empire were pale in comparison to those opposing forces that were breeding within the changing society. Generally speaking, the growing authority of the Protestant states in Germany empowered by the Schmalkaldischer Bund (League) of 1531 and procured through the Schmalkald Articles have brought to the unity some important political players such as Anhalt, Würtemberg, Pomerania, the Imperial Free Cities of Augsburg, Frankfurt am Main and Kempten, later to be joined by Denmark (1538). At its peak the League included fourteen Imperial Free Cities and six princes, later Frankfurt am Main and Cologne were withdrawn from it. The process of religious split was not concentrated in Germany alone and soon had dragged good half of Europe into the ongoing religious partition of the continent, while slowly scrambling enough potential to move on to British isles. Northern Europe fell almost immediately into the hands of the new interpretation of Christianity, and Rome by the mid-1500s possessed no practical power strings to pull the vast areas back under its authority. Here it may be appropriate to argue that the very fact of distance from Rome and its imperial legacy made certain parts of Europe fall away in a matter of decades without getting into numerous internal conflicts as Germany or even France did during the Reformation period. On the other hand, T.M. Lindsay has stated in his work, The Reformation that new ideas were spreading fast through such countries as Denmark and there was no serious resistance from them, so after the Diet of the kingdom at Odense (1527), the process of denominational confession was sealed without an internal war.26 Also, countries such as Poland and Hungary were also not integrated into the Roman empire in any way, but remained Catholic despite the spreading of the Luthern and Calvinist ideas, especially among its nobles.27 The same author argues that in Sweden the strengthening of Lutheranism was also somewhat powered by the struggle against Denmark underlining the traditional issue of religion turning into the weapon of ideological warfare against the rivaling country.28 For example, in Poland and Ireland the Catholic Church was sealing its authority and respect through the war against foreign enemies, in Sweden at some point it was a Lutheran concept used against Denmark, before the latter became Lutheran, too. In other words, the proximity or distance to or away from Rome was not always the major factor for concealing the Papal authority of the European continent. It was more the struggle of ideas and political alliances where the economy was playing a larger role than before. Growing bourgeois class did not want to share its wealth with the monastery, the monastery was losing its ideological authority over the people, and the cycle was getting more out of hand for such rulers as Charles V, who simply could not restore the Catholic unity in the Holy Roman Empire. However, in contrast to these Polish nobles who were becoming more interested in the ideas of John Calvin and surely practiced a lot of personal freedoms in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth could not make their country fully Protestant, the cycle mentioned above did not take hold. It may be thought that such intellectual reformers of the Catholic Church as Stanislaw Hozujusz and

25 A.H. Johnson, Europe in the Sixteenth Century 1494-1598: Period IV, (BoD - Books on Demand, 2018) at p. 199. 26 Thomas Martin Lindsay, The Reformation, (T.&T. Clark, 1882) at p. 42. 27 Ibid., p. 41. 28 Ibid., p. 43. 11

Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski, who were indeed the formers, but at the same time led the intellectual side of Counter-Reformation made an impact and the battle was won inside the Cracow Academy walls without spilling out with the rebellious nobles asking their king to rise against the Pope.29 The Augsburg Interim, peace treaties of Passau and Augsburg did not stop the conflict, Religious Wars were only beginning in France during that time and the whole denominational split continued in the 1600s, ignited in the Thirty Years War only to end in 1648 with the Peace of Westphalia.

The sixteenth century was not much better when it came to the religious conflict between the Protestants and Catholics. Humanism with its enlightened principles could not put the broken pieces together but was more on the side of one or the other. For example, Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski was Erasmian, he believed in humanism as much as Thomas More did, both belonged to the enlightened circles of Europe. However, Erasmus himself gave enough intellectual and philosophical ideas as in [Philosophia Christi] to both parties, even though later on did not welcome the Reformation or so to speak has disavowed it.30 He was having enough accusations against Protestant Churches and the Catholic Church and possible it may even be said that he was this free person trying to find the best of all worlds, and thought that any form of violence or simply religious fanaticism had no space for thought and intellectualism. He insisted that his ideas were not observed or read by the leaders of the Reformation with all accuracy, and at the same time reminded Catholic leaders that they should fight ideas with ideas, and not with the fire and sword, something that can only fuel the rage of rebellion.31 What can better explain the grounding environment for any philosopher or just human being than seeing representatives of the same religion, which claims hope, love, and charity, kill each other in the maze of enraging flames? Such a person might have asked back then many sharp questions, whether such an approach is justified and is it capable of bringing some if any constructivism to the future of his faith, family, or any other minor every day undertaking. Something else had to be done by the time when neither side of the given religious war was even planning to give in his position. What could unite people together, and what could be the grounding and unshakable base for the constructive future? Certainly, such people as Erasmus believed in piety, but did they surely know that their reliance on Christianity alone was enough to bring people together, diminish poverty, deadly diseases, eliminate the sheer violence of the nobles and peasants? Possibly they were questioning everything, but they were brought up in times when questioning Christianity itself was too dangerous, thus, anything had to be analyzed and furnished under the caps of Catholicism or Reformation. In contrast, the movement of Thomas Münzer in Germany, which took illiterate masses against the nobles and did not just question the authority of any denomination, but certainly did not believe in piety of any form had failed without leaving any intellectual trace. Possibly neither way was capable of truly changing the situation, but did the post-Renaissance Europe find enough intellectual capabilities to find the way into the future and progress within the religion such as Erasmus, More or Melanchthon did or it needed some other way was still in question at that time. At

29 David A. Frick, Polish Sacred Philology in the Reformation and the Counter-Reformation: Chapters in the History of the Controversies (1551-1632), (University of California Press, 1989) at pp. 34-35. 30 James D. Tracey, Erasmus of the Low Countries, (University of California Press, 1996) at pp. 4-5. 31 Ibid., p. 5. 12

least it was clear that the European thought would never be the same and Reformation itself was the driving force of many changes despite all of its drawbacks. Once a single brick has fallen, the rest of the wall may collapse, resulting in the breach of ideas. The dialog between different groups, negotiations, discussions, and gatherings became more possible after the Reformation had begun.

Renaissance, Humanism and Europe

It’s widely known that this period was the rebirth of the civilization with new horizons to explore. Arts, literature, political thinking, architecture. From Giotto to Machiavelli there was a revival of thoughts and experiences, thus, these very new horizons promised something that was lost in the late antiquity to return. For example, when speaking about architecture it should be noted that Freemasonry was closely related to it and its beginnings can be found in the Medieval and later Renaissance guilds of the stonemasons.

We must not close our review of the architecture of the middle ages, without calling attention to the institution of freemasonry, which in the middle of the twelfth and the beginning of the thirteenth centuries exercised a considerable influence upon art.32

Possibly what may be really important to discuss over here is the whole concept of the Renaissance and its influence on the new thoughts, which were sort of brewing among thinkers of the day, particularly those whom history named to be humanists. Were they movers and shakers of the day? Surely they were and none of the changes could be possible without their involvement in the process of any kind of transformation that was touching Europe during the Renaissance. It must be said that Freemasonry itself became part of the development. Wars and religious changes, political and denominational schisms on one hand, and on the other hand there was this explosion of new styles in art and literature, so clearly it should be pointed out that the future organization of Freemasons has its roots in the latter. Basically, without the Renaissance this organization would most likely not really exist in its future forms, possessing humanistic traditions of the brotherhood between the people, who have joined it from so many different walks of life. ‘Humanism’ as the birth child of the Renaissance can be interpreted in many ways. The word itself was originally applied in English (at least that is suggested by the Oxford English Dictionary) during the early nineteenth century by Matthew Arnold in relation to the dignity of man in relation to primarily secular values.33 Possibly the original use of this term in accordance with A. Goodman and Angus Mackay were shaped by Germans, but technically the meaning of it is definitely speaking for itself - it really stands for something human, ‘humane’, therefore, later use such as ‘human values’, ‘humanitarian help’, etc, rooted in this first implied meaning. Thinkers as Erasmus were part of the movement, which they did not determine with this terminology, but were an integral parts of it, they were surely trying to cut this rough stone of human nature and make it better shaped, without un-humane behavior that was seen as animalistic or anti-cultural. Humanity was the center of this term or better to

32 Nancy R.E. Bell [N. D’Anvers], Elementary History of Art, (London, Asher & Co, 1874) at p. 97. 33 A. Goodman, Angus Mackay, The Impact of Humanism on Western Europe During the Renaissance, p. 1. 13

say this term was supposed to serve humanity, improve it and make it grow. Practically it allowed human beings to grow and empower themselves with knowledge, which was not necessarily aimed at learning how to kill better [think of the armor developed by Da Vinci, also the classic figure of the Renaissance], but to improve humans in such a way, so they do not urge for killings out of greed, sexual pleasures or just sheer wish for violence. It was very eloquently put out by Werner Jaeger in his work Humanism and Theology:

St. Thomas Aquinas teaches with Aristotle that everything aims naturally at its own perfection, as matter aims at its form, The very fact that human nature aims at knowledge and has a desire for it, implies that knowledge contributes to the perfection of man, and that actual knowledge is related to the mere potentiality for it, in human nature, as form is related to matter.34

The age starting with at least the fifteenth century until the first known and well documented speculative Lodge of Freemasons was installed, this notion of perfection or attaining of knowledge that can produce such a change was the major contributing factor. Yes, the Christian idea during the middle ages was more or less based on the concept of the merely God’s given nature, which is already perfect [man is imperfect due to the original sin] because it’s based on the image of God, his perfect nature and humans are not supposed to change anything outside of faith in God.35 Humanism began to add something else. It was now more human-centered, even though such thinkers as Erasmus kept on with their ideas without seriously distancing them away from the Bible or teaching of the Christianity, he wrote his interpretations on Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, sparred with St. Augustine on the pages of his works over Origen, later to counter-argue with Luther, Oecolompadius and Bucer, etc.36 However, there was something completely secular or at least not purely Christian in this movement of ‘humanism’. Noting, Erasmus was the humanist, well known to all the reformers of the Church, however, he was drawn into some degree of sparring with them over the nature of free will.37 The idea of changes and the idea of the ability of human beings to procure such changes was very important to humanists such as Erasmus, and later became the base for the philosophy of the perfection of a rough stone in Freemasonry. This society would later strongly believe that changes are possible, therefore, free will is possible, and not only within the mainframe of the Christian religion. At that point, they would go away further from the original Erasmian, Christian humanism, but still keep an idea of it without really becoming an anti- Christian organization [Masonic Bible with the Square and Compass on it may be seen in almost every Regular Lodge worldwide]. The whole notion of changes became possible with the Renaissance, and the humanist position was the best example of it. Moreover, such changes were of intellectual nature, in other words shaping the stone to build a Cathedral was important as before, but there came a possibility to shape oneself, to change the life of a human being here on this earth and the stone became a human mind - a Rough Ashlar.

34 Werner Jaeger, Humanism and Theology, (Marquette University Press, 1943) at pp. 16-17. 35 Thomas Aquinas, Edmund Hill, Summa Theologiae: Volume 13, Man Made to God’s Image, (Cambridge University Press, 2006) at p. 61. 36 Kathy Ehrensperger, R. Ward Holder, Reformation Readings of Romans, an article by Laurel Carrington, Erasmus’s Readings of Romans 3, 4 and 5 as Rhetoric and Theology, (A&C Black, 2008) at p. 10. 37 Ibid., p. 10. 14

Toward the West a block was found, indented and chipped, as if by design. This is a rough ashlar. Instead of being situated toward the east, the direction where the light comes, signifying intelligence, this rough stone is placed toward the west, the direction of darkness and ignorance. This stone represents apprenticeship, indicative of human imperfection.38

III

Guilds

Organizing into groups that were focusing upon some particular craft or task was not new to Europe or any other part of the world. It may be simply dictated by the human necessity to get together in order to stay safer and create something by sharing further knowledge, secrets, or just sole friendship. Guilds were particularly those human structures that made it possible to co-exist with the often tough reality of medieval Europe, get along with other guilds, share knowledge among those, who were members to improve the craft they were dealing with. To be more precise it should be noted that the guilds were focusing on practical issues too, sheer survival was non less important than the core value of knowledge, for example, way back in Roman times there was a collegium [guild] which was providing special offer, burial with dignity to their members in return for dues.39 They were watching after each other and could maintain the level of personal security, financial safe-nets, and later even such things as guaranteed burials. It’s very peculiar to see or actually hear, how people always like to say that survival alone is not possible, that in order to carry on one must be dealing with other people. Hence, the famous proverb that a lone soldier is not a fighter on the field. Roman guilds [colleges] were also providing one crucial aspect that gave them reason to exist - the social lifts. The social system of any society is well known for many internal divisions based on class, representatives of one class may have no chance to get lifted unless he/she knows someone, who may provide them with such an opportunity. As Steven A. Epstein argues in one of his works:

The harmony resulting from these experiences was apparent within the particular trades, but not necessarily among them, and also freed the artisans to pursue interests beneath the notice of traditional elites of Roman society.40

Getting together into professional groups of interest for a variety of reasons was not new and turned to be particularly important for the artisans, who were interested in personal growth and protection. Life did not stand still and new guilds with the new interests were adding up, but the core principle stayed the same and followed the same formula - professional growth, safety-net, and social lifts. Therefore, it was absolutely alright for the Grand Lodges in the United States to provide insurance to its members way before such a service became fully available in the whole country.41 Past Master of Trinity Lodge #43 in Killingsworth, Amaziah Bay, became seriously ill and could not restore or influence his health without

38 The Masonic Review, Volume 53, (C. Moore, 1880) at pp. 66-67. 39 Steven A. Epstein, Wage Labor and Guilds in Medieval Europe, (UNC Press Books, 1991) at p. 11. 40 Ibid., p. 12. 41 Dorothy Ann Lipson, Freemasonry in Federalist Connecticut, 1789-1835, (Princeton University Press, 2015) at pp. 208, 211. 15

additional help, so he was provided with some help from his fellow brethren in the Grand Lodge, however, it was not enough, so he wrote more to other Lodges in the state to get the sum sufficient enough to part for the sea voyage to restore his ill health.42 It was not something impolite or strange to ask for money or to reach for more assistance, even though many of such organizations could set up higher goals, and Freemasonry was never an exclusion from it. In the entry, the organization of Freemasons filter candidates, who may search for the material goods, because its seen as impolite or improper, they question new people to find out their destined goal and get rid of those candidates who search merely for finances, and social connections. Nevertheless, the concept of charity and mutual help that is promised to be carried out by the Internal Regulations of each Lodge and during the Oath taking is also an integral part of this society, which in these terms turns to be no different from its more early predecessors.

Equally, it must be noted that the work of guilds [colleges] was to collect professionalism and keep the secrets that enhance and improve such professionalism. Carving stones, shaping them, making out cement, building ladders, and other numerous, and titanic skills required special knowledge, of course. Guilds were professional colleges where these skills could be taught during the time of apprenticeship.43 Skilled masters were surrounded by their fellowcrafts, that were already knowledgeable enough to help them, and all of them transferred necessary skill and knowledge to the apprentice, who had just entered their guild [lodging house where the guild was located at that given time period]. Without understanding the concept of guilds, it will be totally impossible to understand Freemasonry, its history, and concept. For example, the word Lodge stands for the place where guildsmen have stayed during the tenure at the workplace near the construction site. Constructed cathedrals were surrounded by such lodging houses in which guildsmen, brethren in the craft could stay for a while, and simply live in them. From it directly comes the term for any place where people stay for a certain period of time, nowadays usually referring to hotels. In order to enter the guild, it was necessary to show determination to learn, show loyalty to masters, and of course readiness to keep secrets of the craft itself. Guilds or particular lodges did not want to share their knowledge with another lodge of craftsmen to be better in the eyes of rich contractors. More secrets could literally mean more beautiful and better churches or lay buildings, it therefore meant more money for the particular lodge or even guild, so keeping things away from the probing eyes of the professional opponents was important. Simultaneously it gave rise to the symbolism, trade- marks, seals, stamps, hand-shakes, and gestures. The whole concept of guilds was seriously important for it all, they were those important gathering places, lodgings were craftsmen, the bearers of certain knowledge could share their skill and information without anyone else looking over the shoulder.

42 Ibid., p. 211. 43 43 The Masonic Review, Volume 53, (C. Moore, 1880) at pp. 66-67. 43 Steven A. Epstein, Wage Labor and Guilds in Medieval Europe, (UNC Press Books, 1991) at p. 11. 43 Ibid., p. 12. 43 Dorothy Ann Lipson, Freemasonry in Federalist Connecticut, 1789-1835, (Princeton University Press, 2015) at pp. 208, 211. 16

Political Life in Europe. Changes. What Could Unify?

Religious turbulences and numerous conflicts between royal families were the norm during the 1500s and 1600s without any doubt leaving no room for unity in Europe. It was the boiling pot, in which nearly everyone was involved in one way or another. Escapism would form during that time in the way of going to the New World, and it’s no coincidence why particularly during that time this notion of creating something outside one’s traditional, feudal home began to take shape. The European continent was truly forming as the newly discovered political and religious concept, which in one way was trying to get back, in the form of Counter- Reformation, but at the same time, even those reactionary forces were changing themselves while trying to stop the change. For example, the Jesuits, who without any doubt, were as Catholic as anyone can imagine today, back then were seen as dangerous to the existing Catholic or royal establishment, their vocal rhetoric and an overall methodology where means justify the ends made a push for the internal change within that very establishment and the Catholic Church itself. They were seen as Luther from within, highly influencing everything around them, questioning the authority of the Pope, but never trying to separate from the Church or question its core dogmatic teaching. William H. Taylor is arguing in his article Conscious in their own Idolatry that in 1558 the Archbishop of Dublin [supposedly Bronswell], while looking up to Spain where Jesuits were put under the suspicion, spoke against them in the most viral and direct way, leaving them no exception or possibilities to express their actions. He argued that Jews should find more welcome than Jesuits, whose talents must not be practiced, and they shall not find any residence on earth.44 It’s quite peculiar that these people were seen as nemesis to so many despite all the major differences and opposing forces of Europe during that time. It was solely interesting to see how the internal political and theological differences within the same Church could not always find a common language in the face of an ongoing Reformation, which threatened the very core of the Catholic dominance. Europe divided was Europe reformed. Additionally, this division was probably the main source or possibility to fulfill such a reformation process. Charles V of the Holy Roman Empire possessed the divided state in his hand, while being Catholic himself, he could not control such figures as the Philip I Landgrave of Hesse or Johann I Friedrich, Elector of Saxony, who on their side were promoting and protecting Luther and his teaching. Particularly the activities of Georg Spalatin, tutor and teacher of the Elector, who was bringing the connection between the university where Luther was prominent and the first. This connection was surely making the force of educated people get closer to the ruling classes45 Politics and changes of the day were brought in through intellectual development, which was already known within the Catholic institutions. The Church should be given credit for that because most likely without it’s universities, colleges, and monasteries where such personalities as Luther grew up as

44 Peter C. Messer, William Harrison Taylor, Revolution as Reformation: Protestant Faith in the Age of Revolutions, 1688-1832, an article by William Harrison Taylor, Conscious of Their Own Idolatry. American Newspapers, the Suppression of the Jesuits, and American Religious Liberty, (University of Alabama Press, 2021) at p. 84. 45 Mark A. Lamport, Encyclopedia of Martin Luther and the Reformation, Volume 2, (Rowman & Littlefield, 2017) at p. 389. 17

theologians and attained education, it wouldn’t be possible at all. The Church was the base for the change in many aspects because it sort of preserved the intellectual capabilities among its ranks, and later simply could not hold them under the Pope’s authority. It certainly seems that up to this day the Catholic Church remains in this position of trying to unify the academic knowledge of any kind with the religion.

Pope John Paul II described a Catholic University as “a place of research, where scholars scrutinize reality with the methods proper to each academic discipline, in order to contribute to the treasury of human knowledge, (ECE, 15).46

The political unity of Europe and changes that took place were incredible, and yet their achievements, and at the same time tragedies have divided the house. Violence practiced by the Catholic Church against those who disagreed with its principles was often fueling more protest and uniting the defenders of the Reformation. On the other hand, these defenders were practicing looting of the monasteries, pillaging, and equally sinful acts of violence that could not be excused. Both sides of this great European conflict were doing everything to justify their cause and win, and the latter required a lot of violent acts of war. The 1600s were not much better than the previous century if looking at this division. The Thirty Years War was certainly the pinnacle of this conflict in Europe and was specifically devastating to German lands, which became so routed out by war that possibly due to this reason they could not fully participate in the process of settling the New World, procure growing overseas mercantilism and generally could not unite into one state such as France or Spain. In Germany at the beginning of that conflict, the population numbered around twenty million, and by the end, it went down to seven or six million, so it can be estimated that two-thirds of the population were taken down by war, disease, and famine, something absolutely unprecedented during that time in that area of Europe.47 The question may arise about what could actually unite humanity and what particular principles were capable of bringing people together during that time? As it was mentioned before such thinkers as Erasmus could often be equally critical of both parties, he did not fully agree with either Catholic scholastics or the Protestant concept of predestination. Humanists were giving the rise to something else, even though many were standing within the concepts of their religious beliefs. Melanchthon was famous for his humanist approach to theology, Thomas More was also part of this school of thought, but remained to be the staunch Catholic. Particularly during that time, an idea of science began to take shape in Europe, and to many, it became quite obvious that those who believe in numbers, natural principles, and geometric figures can go hand in hand regardless of religion, territory, political system or even closely watched borders. So to speak the concept of the Square and Compass did not require any additional theological or political interpretations, it merely knew two things, rationality and common sense. In other words, two plus two will always be the same, but the interpretation of the Epistle to Romans may be interpreted in many different ways.

46 Joseph Domfeh-Boateng, The Catholic Church, (Xlibris Corporation, 2014) at p. 165. 47 Gustav Krause, The Growth of German Unity: An Historical and Critical Study, (D. Nutt, 1892) at p. 29. 18

The Situation in England and its Direct Neighbors

This country was no different from its other continental neighbors and was participating in the process of transformation. Religious conflicts one after another were splitting the elites and society. Often the whole situation seemed that it would be impossible to identify who is going to be on the top of the royal hill, Protestants or Catholics. While the conflict was breeding and exploding, it was really difficult to tell if the country was really benefiting from the Reformation or not because it brought too much discontent and civil unrest. Sir Thomas More, the humanist, was executed for not listening to his king, one century later Charles I’s head fell from the ax, and Cromwell’s version of the Protestant faith fell upon the numerous subjects, who in return later welcomed the Restoration. David Hume was later giving some historical thoughts on the developments that took so many lives on the British Isles during those turbulent times, he was calling it the religious enthusiasm, and gave it some objective critique.

Enthusiasm produced ‘the most cruel disorders in human society’, infusing ‘the deluded fanatic with the opinion of divine illuminations and with a contempt for the common rules of reason morality and prudence’.48

Wars of religion as in continental Europe were seen as the most horrific developments in the history of those countries that have experienced them, but at the same time as it was mentioned before, experienced the process of cultural revival, often fatal, but necessary changes, art and humanism. This interesting paradox reminds of one seriously strange idea that anything new and beautiful is always born in pain and suffering. The idea of something that happens in this world all the time, but at the same time slightly cynical and perhaps scary. On the other hand, contrary to D. Hume, Matthew Reyonolds argues that the Reformation in England showed the strength of this country and with the help of it could successfully resist the absolutist tendencies of the ambitious Stuart monarchs, so protecting the independent spirit of the English people themselves.49 This position is showing this general tendency in thinking that England and later Britain were also too strong and triumphant to be a part of any foreign influence, thus, propagating its freedom and the independence of its people. Perhaps, this particular notion is one of the most identifying British self-identifying thoughts about that particular time in its history. Later on, English and British Freemasons would try to remove religious discussion and politics away from their lodges completely. Why? There was no possibility of any cohesion, while keeping these differences not at bay, they had to be removed before starting any constructive Ritual labor inside the lodge. Even today many Freemasons find it exclusively difficult to cooperate with one another without removing politics and religion if they don’t share them in common. Nevertheless, the Reformation was taking hold on the British isles with the same speed as in many continental European regions, though it began from the top and did not require any special figure as Luther to create the ideological

48 Charles D. A. Prior, Glenn Burgess, England’s Wars of Religion, Revisited, (Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 2013) at p. 3. 49 Matthew Reynolds, Godly Reformers and Their Opponents in Early Modern England: Religion in Norwich, C. 1560-1643, (Boydell Press, 2005) at p. 3. 19

force behind it. It should not be forgotten that John Wyclif was before Luther and even Jan Hus to whom he was an example of the true zeal, someone who attempted to really change the Church for the better without any fear.50 Wyclif puts England on the map of Reformation ahead of the continent, even though later the continent became more radical in it, after all the Church of England was more similar to the Catholic Church and did not welcome radicalism. It should be mentioned that the situation of England itself should not be seen without looking at its direct neighbors Scotland, Wales, and Ireland. All of them were different in culture and traditions, all fought with England for independence and eventually did not welcome its version of the Reformation. Ireland remained Catholic and this denominational loyalty turned to be very important for its resistance against England and later the United Kingdom. Scotland formed its own version of Calvinism named Presbyterian Church, which also signaled the difference. Once again, religious affiliation was interconnected with the patriotic feelings, cultural identity, and sheer ideology of resistance against someone, who shares different religious practices. This peculiar mosaic of the Protestant denominations on the British islands and the strong position of Catholics in Ireland, later development of Parliament with its various political positions could well give rise to the need for a society that would put merely humanist ideas at the forefront of its concept bypassing religion and politics. As it was mentioned before in order to speak without a conflict Freemasons have to stop discussing religion and politics, and often this rule remains intact even after the lodge closes its Ritual labors because some brothers often can fall into deep and differentiating discussions. Humanism and Britain were going hand in hand, but while looking at the last argument it may be important to underline that without the Reformation the society of Freemasons would not come into existence. Truly the rise of politics and various denominations in England and the neighboring countries forced many people to think of the reconciliations, and therefore, form organizations that would permit them to overcome these often irreconcilable differences. At the same time, Protestantism was giving this sort of opportunity to speak up, freely or not, create these differences that required reconciliation and humanism, later on, the reason and enlightenment. Relying on nature, laws that it gave, new scientific discoveries, geometry that is the same regardless of the religious affiliation, the wisdom of nature itself that needed no theology was at most interesting.51 That was the birth certificate of Freemasons and their principles. Natural philosophy, secular humanism, and not religion was this development that was growing alongside the reformation, but was standing on quite different fundamental principles; it did not require religion as the common and unquestionable truth. To any theologian such as Luther or Calvin, the Bible was the only source of this truth, there was no possible way to get away with it, however, the principles of secular humanism began to stand out, and England was getting ahead with the birth of new ideas that counted on math and science even more than sheer beliefs. The common language of numbers seemed to appear as the ultimate truth built into this universe by the Creator or in the society of Freemasons [regular and Deistic in their principles] better known

50 Paul Avis, Beyond the Reformation?: Authority, Primacy and Unity in the Conciliar Tradition, (Bloomsbury Publishing, 2008) at p. 59. 51 Micheline Ishay, The History of Human Rights: From Ancient Times to the Globalization Era, (University of California Press, 2008) at p. 84. 20

as the Grand Architect of the Universe.52 As long as these principles were shared and understood they needed no further understanding such as an interpretation of the Biblical verses required and could change depending on the interpreter. Therefore, in order to understand it, that may be necessary to study the roots and causes of the Reformation and humanism where Freemasonry came into existence.

Reformation in Britain, Humanism and Guilds in England

Humanists

Humanism and Britain are two terms that often go inseparable if discussing the period of Reformation and everything that followed it. As it was mentioned in the previous chapters, humanism, Freemasonry, and Reformation possess similar backgrounds or so to speak the same age. Its one of the most important aspects of this work, to analyze and see parallels between them, how different and how similar they were, and how they could influence each other. This process of coexistence was very visible in Britain and perhaps it’s no coincidence that all of these often opposing forces began to prosper in that area of Europe. Often it is difficult to measure the limits of the Renaissance and humanism in terms of time-scale, it all happened in different centuries, sometimes one generation was standing in between two prominent figures, who are now associated with the Renaissance or humanism. Petrarch and Chaucer were separated by a generation and it seriously influenced the latter, Wyatt and Surrey are often seen as part of the same time period, but they were not living during the same generation for sure.53 Such examples certainly put all of it in a difficult time measuring process, which in return complicates the process of defining humanism in particular, when and how did it come to Britain? Chaucer was probably the beginning, to those who consider the Reformation as part of the Renaissance, it may be Wyclif, but this argument may be left for various arguments, plus the latter was living way before the Reformation truly came to England, he may be seen as the brightest star before the dawn. England did not experience the Republic similar to Florence but possessed the Magna Carta. The war between Florence and Milan [including Gregory XI] was seen as despotic by the Florentine libertas class, and all included not only a physical conflict but ideological.54 In England, such ideological conflicts did not really begin well until the Tudors, and the previous War of the Roses was merely a conflict between the two political families, ideas were not included as some driving force behind them. So, returning to humanism it must be said that in Britain it was directly influenced by the all ongoing European process of the continuous Renaissance, and newly discovered ideas. Humanists tried to perfect even Latin, brought their opinion into every aspect of life, including religion, and were influencing

52 Albert G. Mackey, Encyclopedia of Freemasonry and its Kindred Sciences, Volume 2: D-L, (Jazzybee Verlag, 2016) at p. 332. 53 Lee Patterson, Frederick W Hilles, Literary Practice and Social Change in Britain, 1830-1530, (University of California Press, 1990) at p. 156. 54 Ibid., p. 166. 21

theology [Thomas More, Erasmus]. Many successfully attempted to rid Latin of new words that were not presented in the writings of the classical authors.55 Language was generally very important to humanists, their skill was the language and they often may be seen as the original publicists, since the classic Juvenal. England was no different, and humanists such as Alexander Barclay were participating in the critique writings. As Andrew Fitzmaurice noted:

Barclay, while probably born in Scotland, was one of the leading humanists of England. He published the first English translation of Sallust, choosing the Jugurthine war, in which Sallust attributed responsibility for Rome’s decline to the link between empire and the venality of the nobility56.

This tradition of using the language as the weapon, often possessing a good degree of sarcasm and cynicism continued on, and prospered among such famous Freemasons as Voltaire, therefore, showing the parallel between freethinking, Freemasonry, and humanists. They simply could not look quietly at the developments of their age, they began to understand that religion is not the only way to solve all of humanity’s problems, and something else is required to do so. Many of them were part of the colonization process, looking at it as an opportunity to vent off new ideas, create the New World of which they have dreamt. A lot of English humanists such as John Rastell, Thomas Smith, Philip Sidney, Humphrey Gilbert, Walter Raleigh, and those who belong to them, too or protected humanists, Richard Eden, John Florio, Dudley Digges, Henry Wriothesley, all participated in the trans-Atlantic undertakings of the day.57 On the other hand, Alexander Barclay first did not approve of the long sea voyages attempted by his country and had translated Sebastian Brandt’s The Ship of Fools, alluding to these voyages as something unnecessary and strange. He has certainly misunderstood the magnitude of such a race for the new and was more as an exclusion from his fellow humanists of the day. There are technically two values that can be traced to humanists and Freemasons, first both have always required a certain level of freedom, second, an urge for progress. In both cases, such organizations as Inquisition or purely authoritarian monarchy would never be able to surely tolerate Freemasonry because of the first’s totality of thinking and inability to open margins for thoughts. The Reformation was often very different from humanism, but also broke out and began to ask for more freedom, often closing it to its opponents, but still making enough noize, so others could slip in under the closed door. Freemasonry was later associated with all the polymathic and humanist values exactly due to their common interests in progressive ideas and the certain level of freedom without which both concepts would not be able to survive. Of course, both were advocating religious freedom because they did not take theology for granted. At this point, Freemasonry and humanists strongly parted ways with the Reformation, and most of the Protestant beliefs, but in the end, both were more reaching out because theology alone was not enough, equally for the Freemasons and humanists.

55 Jill Kraye, The Cambridge Companion to Renaissance Humanism, an article by Kristian Jensen, The Humanist Reform of Latin and Latin Teaching, (Cambridge University Press, 1996) at p. 69. 56 Andrew Fitzmaurice, Humanism and America: An Intellectual History of English Colonisation. 1500-1625, (Cambridge University Press, 2003) at p. 26. 57 Ibid., p. 1. 22

Reformation

Some information should be given about the Reformation on the British isles in the general context of this ongoing process on the continent. At least, theoretically, it seems that particularly in England the process was different in one crucial aspect, it was really headed by the establishment without having any special clerical figure, which made it theologically or ideologically possible [such as Luther, Zwingli, or Calvin]. At some point, John Calvin was one of the political rulers of Geneva, and Luther was actually the first one, who contributed to the overall cause of the whole movement. In England it was the king himself, who had decided to make the first step, not as radical as later Puritans would, they just didn’t exist during his time in the same form as during the following sixteenth century, but wanted to have his ‘Catholic’ church without the Pope. Personal situation, a wish to have an heir, the wrong Bishop of Rome under the control of France, all these factors have coincided and produced the situation, which made the English Reformation happen. The grip on power was wishful, indeed, and asked for more control over the finances, the same situation as in many German states. Historian Diarmaid MacCulloch argues that it's important to see the situation inside the Church in England and specifically pay attention to the fact that Canterbury was more important than York, Canterbury was closer to the center of real power, it basically wanted to control its own Church.58 Nobility did not make any serious moves to prepare the Reformation, or influence it prior to the Edwardian final decision to move on, probably without fully understanding the end-means of his undertakings. For example, the Syon Abbey was famous for being highly respected by the English nobility, and particularly London, and often was seen as the ‘printing center’ under the king’s and Cardinal Wolsey’s protection.59 Eventually, even this place would be dismantled as the Abbey in 1539, and the whole process was led by the monarch; in contrast, Germany was divided, its princes thought differently and theological discussion was burning right in the middle of it. Suddenly, but surely, relics became unwanted, myriads of saints, and the whole variety of dues paid to the holy sites was condemned and seen as ‘fraud’. One of such occasions is mentioned by Wriothesley in the Chronicle. It took place in February 1545 when a priest at Paul’s Cross was supposedly pretending that he was bleeding during the mass by cutting his finger, the ‘miracle’ was seen as fraud.60 It cannot be said that the public did not take sides in England, nobility and royalty were changing from the Queen Mary to Elizabeth, in other words, it all did not go all peacefully, and the restoration of the Catholic faith on the state level had indeed happened, before the Church of England was fully established. However, England did not see an immediate resistance. Later in the sixteenth century, England went through the English Civil War that in many ways could be paralleled to the Thirty Years War in Germany, but with way less damage done to the country. That war was highly influenced by the religious issues which were directly intertwined with politics and the royal succession.

58 Diarmaid MacCulloch, The Reign of Henry the VIII: Politics, Policy and Piety, an article by D. MacCulloch, Henry VIII and the Reform of the Church, (Palgrave Macmillan, 1995) at p. 159. 59 Ibid., p. 164. 60 Wriothesley, Chronicle, i. 152. See also The Reign of Henry the VIII, D. MacCulloch, p. 150. 23

Royalty in England was not purely bought for Puritanism, it wanted to either remain closer to Rome or have its own Church with nearly all the attributes of Catholicism, but on its own terms.

Every day issues such as marriages among clergymen were not fully defined and often it was very difficult to tell whether it was practically or doctrinally Catholic or more Protestant in its nature. It identified the lack of theological discussion on one hand, and governmental, or better to say royal determination to quickly and surely make necessary changes alongside the document similar to the Augsburg Confession. Anthony Blake, the well-known rector of Whiston and vicar of Doncaster married Elizabeth Metcalf, and confessed about it on 16 April 1554, however, his problems did not end there, later he was courted and separated from her company by force.61 Similar faith awaited William Perpoincte, rector of Widmerpool and of Holme Pierrepont, he had married before the information had reached the authorities, and therefore, was supposed to commit himself to the court.

‘Maisters, I have been depryved of this benefice and others of my spirituall lyvinges for that yt haith apperyd to my ordinatyes that I have beene maryed and truethe ys I confesse, and I declare unto you that preistes’ mariages be not lawful but reprovyd by many authorities. Therefore, yf I have sayd or preachyd any thinge heretofore to the contrary, I am very sory therefore and desyer you not to be offendyd therewith’.62

Did the situation differ in Wales, Scotland, and Ireland. The latter remained Catholic and as it was argued in the previous chapters, religion turned to be the symbol of resistance and national identity for the Irish. Scotland became Presbyterian, adding more to the pluralism on the British isles. 1560 is the well-known date of the Scottish Reformation, however, it’s been argued by many scholars that this particular year was not revolutionary and that changes happened before piece by piece, radicalism did not present itself. Gordon Donaldson argued that ultra protestants were not given the way, and at least two-thirds of the bishops and dignitaries retained their revenues and were presented on the councils.63 John Knox did not go in the direction of total puritanism, however, did not align himself with the Lutheran position creating a conceptually Scottish version of Calvinism. Institutions and people who were involved in the clerical life prior to 1560 were mostly not removed, blood was not spilled as in England or moreover in Germany, though one archbishop was hanged and a cardinal murdered, mostly over political reasons.64 The Book of Discipline may be seen as the document included in Knox’s history with the mere wish to show what not to do, and not as the constitution resembling law of the land. Two structures were seen in existence, old and new where the old one was not cut into pieces, severely punished, or forced to change. Presbyterian congregations were growing in Scotland prior to 1560 and sort of replaced the old Catholic order of things. Additionally, it may be argued that it was an example of tolerance which later on played the above-mentioned role in the formation of Freemasonry. In this particular issue, the factor of tolerance or the lack of vengeance should be noted as the procurement of certain degrees of freedoms or at least no wishes to rip the opponent apart. In Wales the Reformation was similar

61 A.G. Dickens, Reformation Studies, (A&C Black, 1982) at p. 102. 62 Ibid., p. 103. 63 Gordon Donaldson, The Scottish Reformation, (Cambridge University Press, 1960) at p. 74. 64 Ibid., p. 75. 24

to Scottish [but not Calvinist] and included the notable consent of the elites by the same famous year of 1560; it was greatly influenced by England, saw the resurgence of pro-Catholic sympathies in the following two centuries, but did not go violent and was standing on compromise.65 Scottish and Welsh examples of such a compromise were in many ways parallel with humanists and surely were closer to the Erasmian worldview of no fanaticism.

III

Guilds in England

The whole history of guilds in England is almost as old as the country itself beginning with the Anglo-Saxon period, and goes back to the concept of kinships and village [house] communities [not only in England, but pretty much elsewhere].66 It proves the concept of the collective human nature to get together for a variety of purposes, help each other, share knowledge and provide information on the common enemy. On the other hand, such authors as Edwin Seligman believe that the Anglo-Saxons were not founding their early predecessors to guilds on this house community principle. He argued:

There is absolutely no evidence that any of the Anglo-Saxon guilds were founded on such a basis, nor is there any more reason to assert a similar origin for those of the continent… Combined efforts of individuals have always existed to supplement the defects of government and to afford mutual protection in case of need.67

In the previous chapter, guilds were related to the concept of collegia and the attempt of people to merely exist, however, in this world, the whole concept of the guild may vary from one place to another, traditions are not the same and carry the weight of local customs. It is important to show all the various sources and ideas to form the right concept of the guild, primarily in the area where Freemasonry has originated. During the Anglo-Saxon period, the guilds [gyldscipes] possessed religious, social, or protective purposes, and one of the most important ones was the first where the clergymen [brethren, members] were paying a particular sum - dues, that were regularly required from them.68 It in many ways resembles the formation of the Masonic lodge where members also pay their dues, in order to have a treasury in case of any trouble or just another festive and charity spending. Almoner [Brother of Mercy] and Treasurer take care of these financial undertakings and possess a lot of trust from their brothers. The most famous priestly guilds during the Anglo-Saxon period were the guild at Woodbury, established by bishop Osborn, and many more at Evesham, Chersey, Bath, Pershore, Worcester, Winchcombe, and Gloucester.69

65 Alec Ryrie, The Age of Reformation: The Tudor and Stewart Realms 1458-1603, (Taylor & Francis, 2017) at p. 279. 66 Henry Sumner Maine, The Early History of Institutions, (J. Murray, 1890) at p. 79. 67 Edwin R.A. Seligman, Publications of the American Economic Association, (Nov., 1887, Vol. 2, No. 5) at pp. 9-10. 68 Ibid., p. 10. 69 Ibid., p 11. 25

The members give yearly donations of money or wax to preserve the candles at the religious services, bring malt, honey, wheat, wood and corn as well as bread to be distributed in alms.70

All the possessions of the Masonic lodge often appear to be very similar to the church decoration or paraphernalia. Though it must be quickly noted that any regular Masonic organization is not identifying itself with the religion, however, opinions may differ even among Freemasons themselves, thus, some argue that it’s part of the religion of each brother.71 Guilds were the home to Freemasons and without understanding them it may be nearly impossible to grasp the concept of this organization. Surely, the guilds were not merely of the religious purpose, as it was already mentioned, they included social and protective aims, something that is certainly natural to any society. All of them included the concept of special dues or collective payments that each member had to share with the guild. It’s very peculiar to take a look at the merchant guilds in England during the late middle ages period well until Edward VIII. They were not very different from the guilds with the social purposes and were chaired by the master, who insofar was accompanied by the steward and wardens [chaplains were also included].72 This part shows another particular resemblance to the Masonic internal organization. It also may be important to note that any lodge is similar particularly to this social type of guilds without really including protective meaning, but some brothers may see it as protection from the life turbulences as well as long as it comforts their position. At the same time, it's difficult to search for the guilds that were serving the purpose of occultism unless they were including such personalities as nowadays are better known as alchemists. Alchemy was not really seen as a useful craft and the guilds of doctors or artisans were more appealing to the city councils or any other form of authority in towns, so alchemists were not really formed into guilds, possibly because of their suspicious art.73 Nevertheless, even if they have possessed some form of connectivity between each other it had to include such titles as master and apprentice because it well included the learning process with possibly dubious results - precious metals were not created from the vulgar metals. Universities were also not too fond of them, and their studies were not part of any faculty during the medieval or especially later periods. Freemasonry is often associated with alchemy, for example, one of the common symbols often found is Ouroboros, a snake that is biting its tail. The allegorical meaning of it stands for the rebirth process and eternal life, it may be commonly discovered on emblems of the Lodges, implemented in the designs of ritual necklaces, pendants, etc. In the practical alchemy, it stood for the transfusion of elements, constant movement, and also eternity in nature. Guilds of the alchemists could be secretive as was their craft. Additionally, the idea of guilds in England will be also discussed further in the following chapter along with the origins of Freemasonry, and the Age of Reason during which this organization was formed as the one the world knows today. The guilds were its traditional or structural homeland.

70 Ibid., p. 12. 71 Ed. Henry W. Rugg, The Freemason’s Repository, Volume 20, (E. L. Freeman & Son, 1891) at p. 523. 72 Com. Hist. Mss, Report of the Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts, (starting from 1870) at pp. 304, 344. 73 Tara Nummedal, Alchemy and Authority in the Holy Roman Empire, (University of Chicago Press, 2008) at pp. 17-18. 26

Origins of Freemasonry and the Age of Reason

Early Evidence

As it was stated previously the Freemasonry has its roots in the tradition of guilds, particularly those that existed in England since the Anglo-Saxon time. The driving factor was based on the wish of people to get together, share knowledge, protection, interests, and of course their professional skills. Surely, in each country or land, such gatherings or groupings may differ, and as was said before in the chapter, in England it was primarily based on clerical, social, and protective interests. Often the merging between guilds and halls of power was very close, hence rich men were members of these social organizations in the town, procured support for one or the other branch of social and economic life, and could easily play the role of magistrate by having membership in it.

In some such cases the guild-hall, as the most important building in the place, was gradually put at the disposition of the community and served as the town hall.74

At the same time later it may be possible to draw the parallel between the self-governing Protestant communities, guilds, and Masonic Lodges. All of them did not enjoy stranger’s probing eyes, who wanted to put them all under any kind of regulation or economic governance. In the 1600s this tradition of guilds and gatherings based on skill or interest did remain, and despite the fact that some were gone, others began to play even more important roles. Expansion of London did not stand in the way of this development too, and maybe played an even more important role during the entry into the era of mercantilism, growing business interests, and trade. Ian Anders Gadd and William Wallis noted that in the eighteenth-century guilds became much weaker, but this issue is often mistakenly related to the previous century, when they still remained very powerful.75 It means that in the century when Freemasonry formally still did not exist, the significance of guilds was seriously on the high level. In this work, there is at least an attempt to clearly connect Freemasonry and the Reformation, however, there is also an attempt to bond Freemasonry with the guilds, and more should be said about the Knights Templar. The following is very popular among many researchers, speculative writers, and what is most peculiar, career historians. It’s not merely the time span that separates Freemasonry from them, as much as it separates them from Egypt, but also the lack of certain documents, chronicles, or paintings that could definitely support such an argument. It clearly seems that there is a direct connection to the birth of humanism, early and later developing science, reason, and English guilds with its rich traditions that even include some similar terminology [warden, steward, chaplain, etc]. Moreover, Freemasonry was never the religious organization or a cult or a group related to such terms, but the Knights Templar was part of the Catholic Church until the first was unjustly dispersed. There are simply too many speculations on this possible connection to the Knights Templar and often they all remind of bad, yellow

74 Edwin R.A. Seligman, Publications of the American Economic Association, p. 43. 75 S.R. Epstein, Maarten Prak, Guilds, Innovation and the European Economy, 1400-1800, (Cambridge University Press, 2008) at p. 290. 27

press journalism. The possible, and it's very logical, relation may be that the knights were also builders, particularly religious structures were within their competence, so after the destruction of their order, many of them, who were not prosecuted could continue [Building Fraternities] with the skill they have known before.76 It must be evidently shown that this way could be the most convenient way to survive until the 1600s, blend or add to the guildsmen terminology, generally become part of the guild social and professional networking, and as the given, introduce it all to the new upcoming Masonic tradition. Building traditions, geometry, aprons, the very term ‘craft’, literally everything shows that those guilds that had involvement in the operative masonry were predecessors of the speculative Free and Accepted Masons. Also, the latter is directly alluding to the Lodge itself as the First Temple, the Temple of Solomon and every Lodge possesses the Altar, which is always positioned in the East of the Lodge [allegorical Temple]. These allusions and parallels sort of unite the concept of Freemasonry and the Knights Templar through the masonic guilds and building fraternities of England. Additionally, it’s quite clear that this social organization did not grow out from any other guild or fraternity, but the one which was directly tied to builders, thus, once again stating the direct connection to this possible logical line that bonds Templars with the building fraternities. Speculations always grow strong when historians deal with secret or semi-secret social groups, legends, myths, the flamboyant exoticism always surrounding them and gives readers the whole myriad of conspiracy theories. Nevertheless, the history of speculative Freemasonry and not operative masonry of the guilds did not really begin before 1717. Later on, Masonic writers led the roots of this organization and its traditions to the most ancient times, claiming that this very tradition had started during Adam and his followers.77 However, it’s important to note that the noble arts of geometry, or arithmetics indeed began at least during the Ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt, but not the Free and Accepted Masons that use the symbolism of geometry and arithmetics. It was clearly forming, however, there is no clear evidence of anything we know as Freemasonry, in its well-famed form today. The master-builder in the masonic guild is not exactly the same figure as the master mason in the speculative Masonic lodge, the same can be related to the rest of the officers, who work in them. Further on it will be more and more crucial to understand the allegorical nature of the Freemasonry and its presence in philosophy, when the stonemasons were not really philosophers belonging to some gentlemen’s city club. Attributes of stonemasons, the guild structure, and possibly some elements of the Templar traditions [not clear or documented] have merged with the philosophy that began to develop in Europe and particularly England during the 1600s. The gentlemen’s club known as Freemasonry [Free and Accepted Masons] did put on the symbolism and structure of the guilds [building fraternities], but the meaning of the first is not the same, and cannot be always traced to much of the pre-1717 period. If a historian finds some document or a plate dating to 1630s which is encrusted with the Square and Compass and such terms as ‘warden’ or ‘master’ written on them that doesn’t mean that Freemasonry was already there in the 1630s - the building fraternity was there sure though. Anyway, there is some dubious but possible evidence that some Lodges did exist, and they could be somewhere in the middle

76 Gottfried Joseph. G. Findel, History of Freemasonry, translation from the second German edition, (Rare Books Club, 2012) at p. 332. 77 See ed. by Robert Peter, British Freemasonry, 1717-1813 Volume 3, (Routledge 2016). 28

between the guild era and the lodges, or simply possible that they were standing on this transitional link. In one of the issues of The Freemason, a weekly journal published with the sanction of His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, Most Worshipful Master of England, and Sir Robert Michael Shaw-Stewart Bart, Most Worshipful the Grand Master Mason of Scotland, there is an article that points out on the existence of a number of Masonic lodges before 1717. It speaks of Sir Robert Padgett, a clerk to the society of Freemasons in 1685, some evidence of Ashmole in 1646 and 1682 [unclear, the Lodge title?], the minute book was found that relates to the Lodge Alnwick in 1702, the author also insisted that Freemasonry was a direct continuation of the operative guilds.78 At the same time, James-Orchard Halliwell argued that in contrast to the creationist Freemasons of his day (first half of the nineteenth century) he traces the origins of English Freemasonry the way he knew it in the 1800s [modern day Freemasonry too] cannot be traced earlier than the end of 1500s.79 It may be added that the origin of Freemasonry is sometimes linked to particular historical figures without having any proof attached to the original claim. One such theory belongs to George V. Tudhope who traced the origin of the speculative Masons to Francis Bacon claiming that there are his signatures bonded to the Anderson’s Constitutions and that they have been found in the old mysteries and even pyramids.80 This theory may be dismissed as lacking all historical evidence and is closer to fantasy than real history.

1700s

This century is well known as the birth time and the golden age of Freemasonry. Practically all the most famous Freemasons lived during that century and the list is very prominently luminous. George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Voltaire, Montesquieu, and Mozart. Basically, up to ninety percent of all these famous Freemasons have either originated in the Protestant countries or lived under the influence of humanistic philosophies, new ideas of parliamentarism, or simply believed in the changing world. Parisian political salons of the day or masonic lodges such as Nine Sisters have produced the whole chain of thinkers, and it’s not a coincidence that Franklin and Voltaire have met in the latter lodge during the American’s stay on a diplomatic mission in France. The eighteenth century was the age when Freemasonry formed itself in the modern form, it became known globally and got into every place in Europe in a matter of a few decades. Basically, the documented history of this organization begins in 1717 with the previously discussed prelude that goes back in the history of Europe and England, but the official year recognized by historians is this, and merely since then it’s possible to trace any historical process associated with it. Reportedly the Freemason’s Chronicle in Band 1 said that lodges also existed before the meeting at Goose and Gridiron in London, particularly in Appletree Tavern, Charles Street, Covent Garden, and in return the Appletree Lodge was one

78 See The Freemason and Masonic Illustrated. A Weekly Record of Progress in Freemasonry, Volume 8, (London, Bro. George Kenning, 1875) at p. 223. 79 James-Orchard Halliwell, The Early History of Freemasonry in England, (Thomas Rodd, 1840) at p. 45. 80 George V. Tudhope, The Discovery of Francis Bacon's Cipher Signatures in James Anderson's Constitutions of the Free Masons, (Health Research Books, 1993) at pp. 1-2.

of those that met with other lodges at Goose and Gridiron.81 The author also alluded to the existence of other lodges that existed before 1717 and it may be well justified. Let’s think logically, it all could not certainly come from nothing in the form known today, the process had to take more time and famous meeting at Goose and Gridiron was merely the time when it became united, the lodges got together and began to develop their common constitutions that would organize them and give the following modus operandi.

Since 1717 Freemasonry began to grow as an organization of free-thinkers, people who don’t just share titles such as steward, warden, or master mason, but are united by certain ideas that people often call freedom. Soon after its documented establishment, the first constitution came about in 1723 written primarily by James Anderson, Presbyterian pastor and a lawyer, printed by William Hunter, so there is no doubt he was behind many articles if not all of them in the given Masonic legal document.82 It is peculiar that there is one impossible task to find any constitution of this organization before 1723, yet one more argument that it was formed in the present shape only through such personalities as James Anderson. Also, the reader might have already paid attention to the fact that the author of the first Masonic constitution was a Presbyterian pastor, however, it will be discussed later in a chapter dedicated particularly to this peculiar person. The spreading of Freemasonry was quick, and maybe even a bit unexpected to its founders because soon it was going to continental Europe attracting more people of prominence and name. Definitely, it was not an architectural guild anymore or anything that had something to do with the stone masonry of the previous 1600s, now it included the constitution, which governed the Lodges, all the stone cutter’s terminology was used symbolically and aprons were not to be used in the builder’s workshop. As the prominent German historian of Freemasonry J.G. Findel has noted:

The Fraternity of Freemasons was now separated from Architecture, forming an Association having purely social aims, and therefore capable of spreading itself to all quarters of the globe.83

The work was now of an intellectual thinking of how to shape oneself, life around and possibly the world, make it better, and what is very important, know no borders within the new brotherhood. As the stone mason’s guilds, the fraternity of Freemasons believed and still believes in the concept of a traveler, with literal and the symbolic Old Testament meaning.84 A word that refers to a brother who can travel from one Lodge [country] to another without having much issues, the only thing that could be asked from his is the password encrypted in signs and gestures [later Masonic passport]. This term was also most likely originated in the guilds and fraternities of the past ages alluding to any stonemason or a craftsman, who wanted to travel and be identified by another friendly guild. This was necessary to call the new 1700s masons, the Freemasons, people who are free and are not bound by borders, or limitations of the civil law of the country that may have class limitations [clergy, nobility, peasantry]. This

81 See The Freemason’s Chronicle, Volume I, an article Old Town Taverns Associated with Masonry, (Volume I, No. 7, 18th February 1875) at p. 98. 82 James Anderson, The Constitutions of the Free-Masons, (William Hunter, 1723). 83 J.G. Findel, History of Freemasonry, (London, Asher & Co, 1869) at p. 138. 84 George Oliver, The Historical Landmarks and Other Evidences of Freemasonry, Explained, (J.W. Leonard & Company, 1855) at p. 206. 30

factor of social lifting gave a lot to the spreading of Freemasonry in the age Enlightenment, the symbolism of equality [to be on the level in Freemasonry regardless of another brother’s social status], mutual help in the case of trouble, find people who are not limited by one particular religious institution or a cult, it all had to be extremely appealing to so many that particularly these principles implemented in the constitution and general regulations of any lodge were behind the sudden popularity of Freemasons. Ideas were belonging to the Age of Reason and the Enlightenment, structured to the guilds of the past, and the amalgam of both had created something unique and irreversible. It may be peculiar to note that it was also the place where people of free will could talk and discuss matters that were not necessarily connected to the themes of Freemasonry. During the festive Agape [Masonic ritual dinner] or during the intermissions brothers could discuss any issue [during the ritual meeting in the lodge political and religious topics are forbidden] without being heard by anyone who was mistrusted.85 Once again, humanism and humanist thoughts, the Age of Reason, and later the Enlightenment, the origins and parallels with the Reformation, traditions of the medieval guilds, and the very birth of Freemasonry in the officially Protestant country all coincide and the aim of this work to point it out by drawing these very parallels.

III

Philosophers, Protestants, and Freemasons

As it was identified in the introduction the development of natural philosophy and Deism among many thinkers in England had coincided with the Glorious Revolution of 1688, which meant the final victory of the Protestant monarchy in that country. At the same time around this time, the Freemasonry began to make its way out as the philosophical society, not merely the guild of builders, and by 1717 was able to form the united Lodge in London [Goose and Gridiron tavern became the most famous place for these first gatherings, but was not the only one]. Matthew Tindal was the Protestant [most likely Anglican] and a deist of not very clear identity, in other words, it's complicated to tell exactly when he became part of this school of thought, but there is evidence that he was belonging to it.86 At the same time, it should be carefully noted that at the very same time England was the place where the idea of Unitarianism was getting quite popular among many freethinkers such as Tindal. The concept called for the possible rejection of the Holy Trinity, one of the most important theological pillars of Christianity, something that could be seen as an arc heresy by all Christian denominations. The Toleration Act of 1689 did not accept anti-Trinitarians because they were not in any way in coherence with the Church of England, and were seen as anti-Christian. Tindal was taking this further step toward Deism as a philosopher and theologian, who was making a lot of arguments on the Scripture and its famous Revelation. His deistic position [which was logically arriving from Unitarianism] had a powerful influence on the Enlightenment, particularly in Germany and the rest of Continental Europe.87 Tindal’s interpretations of the Bible that principally were

85 Emprain Chambers, Chambers's Encyclopædia: A Dictionary of Universal Knowledge for the People, Band 6, (J.B. Lippincott & Company, 1870) at p. 356. 86 Stephen Lalor, Matthew Tindal, Freethinker: An Eighteenth Century Assault on Religion, (A&C Black, 2006) at p. 148. 87 Ibid., p. 154 31

very free, were often directed at the unity among Christians, basically the idea of unity was bothering him a lot, it seems, and the concept of an undivided God was important. Here is an excerpt from his A Letter to the Reverend the Clergy of Both Universities, concerning the Trinity and the Athanasian Creed:

But the innumerable Sects of Christians that so widely differ about the meaning of the plainest Texts, sufficiently shew how subject we are to mistake; therefore to prefer Tradition before our clearest Idea’s, is to prefer probable before certain, Belief before Knowledg, that which we possibly may be mistaken in, before what we are most certain of; which would leave no difference between Truth and Falshood, no means of Credible and Incredible; which would destroy all the Principles and Foundation of that Knowledg God has given us, and render all our Faculties useless, and wholly confound the most excellent Part of his Workmanship, our Understanding.88

This particular quote from Tindal’s Letter shows a few things. First, he is seriously concerned with this notion of divisions among people, in his case Christians, but it seems if a person-thinker is trying to halt heated arguments among other human beings, he or she is seriously hanging on the idea of uniting all of them. As soon as he or anyone else with the same beliefs was indeed trying to understand why people may choose tradition over knowledge, then he was certainly questioning all the Sects-denominations that are willing to destroy their opponents over the sheer tradition. Also, it is peculiar to see his use of words where he says the ‘Knowledge God has given us’ and not, for example, revelation God has given us. He particularly thinks that God must be one for all, regardless of any denominational divisions. Once again, England [Britain and already Ireland] at that time was divided politically and religiously, thinkers as Tindal wanted to escape it by unifying as many sectarians as possible by developing an idea of unity. Hence, his deism was the revolutionary step. Anti- Trinitarianism was growing during the seventeenth century Europe and revealed itself in the Socinian teachings named after an Italian Faustus Socinus [Fausto Sozzini and allegedly his brother Lelio Sozzino], and later formulated by the Polish Brethren group in the Minor Reformed Church of Poland. This movement was part of the so-called Radical Reformation, strongly splitting away from the Lutheran or Calvinist ideas. They believed in the anti- Trinitarian concept of God where Jesus was merely a teacher of good, and not really the son of God. According to them he was telling the old truths about our world and its nature but did not go any further. Deism goes way further than just a sheer Unitarianism, first believing in God without any religion or necessary revelation, second was confined to Christianity that went back to Arianism, later re-stated by the Radical Reformists such as Socinians. These ideas were spread among many English thinkers such as Matthew Tindal, Paul Best, and John Biddle. Paul Best became famous for his writings in which he was further formulating the Unitarian concepts, particularly in the Mysteries Discovered. John Biddle was extending the given view in his famous Twelve Arguments drawn out of Scripture, A Confession of Faith touching the Holy Trinity, according to the Scripture and The Apostolical and True Opinion concerning the Holy Trinity revived and reasserted. John Locke was also not the best Trinitarian and was seriously considering the concepts of Socinians, early Unitarians as possible and granted them

88 Matthew Tindal, A Letter to the Reverend the Clergy of Both Universities, concerning the Trinity and the Athanasian Creed, (London, 1694) at p. 34. 32

some respect, and at least did not believe that Trinitarianism is crucially important, [The Reasonableness of Christianity].89 In contrast, Calvinist thinker John Edwards though believed that the three forces of the Trinity belong to the same God, they could be seen as three different or “distinguished” forces and called himself “tritheistic”.90 On the other hand, the Deistic writers of that day which included Tindal, also incorporated such thinkers as John Toland who believed that God is immanent and the laws of His nature [matter] are inherent and may be active, and these laws are permanent.91 J. Toland’s Christianity not Mysterious published in 1696 was clearly not very Unitarian, but reflected the deistic ideas. The early concepts of deism in England may be traced to such an author and thinker as Edward Herbert of Cherbury, and according to Diego Lucci was the proto-deism based on the natural religion.92 Protestant concepts and philosophy were interchangeably connected during the seventeenth century Britain and were developing concepts that later would be closely related to Freemasonry, they were basically formed almost during the same time.

The traditions of anti-Trinitarians, and particularly Unitarians [Radical Reformists] and Deists have had a profound influence on the development of Freemasons as the philosophical society. The whole concept of the Grand Architect of the Universe, which is seen as one of the most important in Freemasonry is purely deistic in nature. First, this term was applied by no one else but John Calvin referring to the Biblical God. Freemasons began to use this term as the unifying concept of God that would fit any person with practically any religious view. The basic purpose is to make Freemasons undivided by the religion, its denominations, or other theological arguments that were splitting Britain and Europe apart. Their philosophy of unity among brethren is the cornerstone of the organization that if violated can split the organization apart. Eventually, the Freemasonry took the above-mentioned ideas not directly, but conceptually, breathing the spirit of time that included the deistic philosophy, Unitarianism, and generally the Reformation. At the very same time, the 1688 Glorious Revolution in England may be seen as the final victory of Protestantism in that country, and the beginning of Freemasonry which soon followed it. All these events and developments are logically connected by time and principles, bothering some from one another, changing them but seemingly keeping certain things in common.

Toleration Act of 1689 and Freemasons

As it was visible from the previous chapter, after 1688 the Protestant monarchy was in full charge of England and could influence political or religious situations in the country. Generally, speaking the Toleration Act of 1689 was very symbolic, though many attitudes were

89 See John Locke, The Reasonableness of Christianity, (London, Seventh edition, 1764), Paul Best, Mysteries Discovered, (London, 1647), John Biddle, Twelve Arguments drawn out of Scripture, (London, 1647), A Confession of Faith touching the Holy Trinity, according to the Scripture, (London 1648), The Apostolical and True Opinion concerning the Holy Trinity revived and reasserted, (London, 1653). 90 John Edwards, Theologia Reformata, Vol I, (London, Lawrence, 1713) at pp. 282-290. 91 John Toland, Letters to Serena, Letters IV-V, (London, Lintot, 1704) at pp. 131-239. 92 Diego Lucci, Scripture and Deism: The Biblical Criticism of the Eighteenth Century British Deists, (Peter Lang, 2008) at p. 23. 33

more or less possible before it too because so many philosophers and free thinkers could already function in England without being afraid to get severely punished. In contrast, all such free thoughts on the Scripture as were made by J. Toland or John Locke if made in let’s say Spain, they all would not walk away without any punishment. The Toleration Act was yet another attempt by the newly established Protestant monarchs to show their willingness to stay in peace with other denominations and political groups in England, however, it excluded deists and did not really welcome Catholics, hence the conflict was going very deep. The previous King of England James II was Catholic, the conflicting situation was running old and miserable, the threat of the Catholic dynasty was strong, so after the number of events that actually had led to the almost not very violent revolution, his daughter, future Mary II and her husband William III Orange took over the throne. They were reluctant to tolerate Catholics by giving them wider rights, but the same faith did not escape atheists and Unitarians, the new Protestant monarchs knew their political boundaries at least on paper, and the rest depended on local courts or administrators. The seventeenth century was already extending the boundaries of tolerance. In contrast, prior to the Glorious Revolution in order to safeguard his fellow Catholics, but also to the Dissenters, James II had issued the Declaration in 1687 which gave more extended freedom of worship. At this point, the latter Declaration way exceeded the future Toleration Act and the Bill of Rights (1689) because it included all Christian denominations and speaks for James II. It may be noted that back during the earlier Cromwellian period Jews were able to return to England for the first time since 1290. As Theresa M. Bejan has written in her article Evangelical Toleration:

Such arguments in favor of Jewish Readmission offer a prime example of what I call “evangelical toleration.” By this, I do not mean simply theological (particularly Protestant) arguments about the voluntary nature of faith or irrationality of coercion in the cause of conversion… Rather, I mean the argument that toleration is a necessary precondition for individuals to preach and propagate the Gospel and so convert others to it.93

The Toleration Act of 1689 was particularly important to underline and procure this notion, which could also differentiate the Protestant Europe, in this case, England, and Spain where Inquisition was not very meek when it came to pluralism in writings or ideas. However, Catholicism remained un-welcomed possibly due to political reasons, mostly rivalry with Spain and France. Since Edward VIII it was seen as an agent of influence, but then under Mary and William, it did not do the wide-scale executions or violence. Nevertheless, it meant that the future British monarchy was stepping even closer toward tolerance and the emerging Freemasonry had to be a part of it during the formation of the latter in around that more tolerant time. Toleration of gatherings, clubs, talking about different ideas became more possible and visible, even if evangelicals were looking to preach to them afterward to turn their ideas in the direction of faith. The concept of freedom was on the move, but once again had its serious limitations. Deism and certainly atheism [including Unitarians] were not seen as something totally acceptable, too. The very concept upon which the future society of Freemasons will be standing was seen as going too far away from Christianity, even though Unitarianism and

93 Theresa M. Bejan, The Journal of Politics, Vol. 77, No. 4, an article Evangelical Toleration, (University of Chicago Press, October 2015) at p. 1103. 34

various writings on it were acceptable even before this act was issued upon the wider English public. Researcher Wayne Hudson compares different historians who were looking toward the English deism and its roots. This particular work is in one way or another agrees with another researcher Robert Sullivan, who was mentioned by Hudson in one of his studies; the first thought that deism was identical to ‘freethinking’, and ‘rational theology’ in bond with Anglican rationality, Unitarians and Socinians.94 W. Hudson also argues that the whole concept of ‘English deism’ was not merely standing upon English liberal Protestantism, but was also highly influenced by its European origin.95

In the given context, deists were not really seen as another religious group, they were more of the philosophical nature, and therefore could not really fall under the tolerance or discrimination. They were purely the result of a freethinking process of the day. Freemasonry was forming its ground base during that time, some were excluded from the Tolerance Act, some were not really mentioned in there as the deist philosophers, some became tolerated as Dissenters. 1717 and the meeting at Goose and Gridiron was merely the result of these developments. Here is a quote from the Freemason’s Monthly Magazine (1863), which clearly supports the above-stated idea:

The censorship of the press was abolished, personal liberty assured, and finally the Act of Toleration was passed, (1689.)... This whole intellectual movement must necessarily have exerted an important influence on the Fraternity of Masons, and there is scarcely a doubt it contributed essentially to its final transformation into a universal humanitary society…96

Toleration, even partial, always leads to more toleration, once the river dam is broken, then the whole flood of ideas is possible, despite all the odds. Once the Dissenters were allowed to worship, then the English monarchy under Mary II, William III Orange, and even their Catholic predecessor James II began to look less with suspicion upon philosophical gatherings. The groundwork was already made for the future foundations of Freemasons in the Protestant country. After all, it did not happen anywhere else in Europe under different monarchs, even though the ideas discussed above were flourishing in Germany [often were borrowed, example: deistic concepts], Spanish and Italian Renaissance was producing great works of art, Polish- Lithuanian Commonwealth was famous for tolerance for its nobles, and until certain time, religious freedoms, too [Unitarian Polish Brethren, Bathory’s tolerance towards the Orthodox Church]. The intricate fabric of the political, philosophical, and religious life in England [Britain in general] was capable of creating some specific climate that allowed philosophical, deistic, and humanist society to flourish. Freemasonry became one of the most famous and absorbed these ideas and traditions in itself as a philosophical sponge. All these concepts still exist in Freemasonry and are reflected upon its three hundred years old history.

94 Wayne Hudson, The English Deists: Studies in Early Enlightenment, (Routledge, 2015) at p. 4. 95 Ibid., at p. 4. 96 The Freemason’s Monthly Magazine, Volume 22, and article The Origin and Early History of the Fraternity of Masons, (Tuttle & Bennett, 1863) at p. 85. 35

Parliament, Protestantism and Freemasonry

Parliamentarianism in England

The phenomenon of English freedoms is sometimes taken back to the times of the Magna Carta, but also earlier before 1066. Anglo-Saxon kings were not full dictators, sharing a lot of power with other establishments such as witan and shire moots that in return were often based on folk right. Later, the Norman conquest caused the disruption of these quite liberal traditions of the Anglo-Saxon and made certain things more bound to the king, for example, entering the king’s forest became illegal, or general unwillingness to participate in the more centralized Norman government could bring a lot of sentiments about the past among the local population.97 However, what may be truly interesting in this topic is that all of these political experiences in England led to the establishment of Parliament, the decision making and ruling body, which later became the cornerstone of English/British democracy. Public talks and above all questioning of the ruler produced good results but also gave rise to the economic system that later was able to reflect itself with the emerging capitalism. In contrast, Moscovy and later Russian empire did not develop such an instrument and became totally stagnated in the feudal, later absolutist system of government. It was really capable of distinguishing England from many of its neighbors due to certain representation, even if it was the prerogative of rich and powerful landlords, still it was making the development possible. What really mattered is that the king was not absolute since 1215, even though some of them came very close to such a concept, and there is no need to mention the following examples of Edward I or many years later Henry VIII. The following Charters {1216.., 1225] solidified the 1215 concept, and only in 1828 British Parliament repealed most of the chapters [out of 37] keeping merely four; they were replaced by more contemporary laws and regulations.98These monarchs could and indeed twitched the hands of Parliament, but eventually, it ended with such events as the Glorious Revolution or the War of Three Kingdoms, when the first establishment took over the king’s attempts to grasp absolutism in their hands. What it really brought into the social fabric of England was public discussion and legislative debate, something that at many points could go ahead of its time and possibly even exceeded the American Constitution.99 These important developments reflected English and later British society every step of the way by managing to keep it away from tyranny, which often could take place, but did not last forever while being inherited from one absolute tyrant to the other. Parliamentarism with its growing financial and people’s support played a crucial role in the strengthening of the English Reformation using the above-mentioned legislative debate and public discussion. Protestants and primarily Dissenters among them, relied on Parliament and those who were representing them in it. During the seventeenth century, it turned to be the only truly powerful legislative instrument to influence the English monarchy, it became possible to cut finances by hurting the latter, gather an army or just influence events by promulgating needed laws [Test Act or an attempt

97 Stephen Morillo, Warfare under the Anglo-Saxon Kings, 1066-1135, (Boydell & Brewer Ltd, 1997) at p. 181. 98 Ralph V. Turner, Magna Carta: Through the Ages, (Pearson Education, 2003) at p. 187. 99 William Selinger, Parliamentarism, From Burke to Weber, (Cambridge University Press, 2019) at p. 178. 36

to legislate three Exclusion bills]. It all worked in favor of different branches of power, and, therefore can be directly connected to the procrastination of freedoms. In return, it can be directly connected to the discussed topic of the given work by relating it to the process of Reformation and Freemasonry, which later resembled the system of Parliamentarism, and was able to govern itself along the Constitutional lines.

Protestant Self-Governance

The Protestant Reformation managed to break away not only from the dogmatic principles of the Roman Church [theological principles, canon law, etc], but also separate from the governing vertical of the Vatican. First, newly established structures within the Protestant organization needed to create their own vertical of authority as was done in the Lutheran and specifically Anglican Churches. In many ways, they were resembling the Roman Church and the Archbishop of Canterbury was highly authoritative, stepping merely to the English king or queen. More self-governing turned to be in the Reformed Churches, and it was highly visible when such groups as Puritans came about during the seventeenth century. This denomination(s) had to learn how not just to organize their own communal living, but actually survive under pressure in England and later the New World. The infantilism of dogma that did not often require a lot of self-questioning and thinking gave rise to debates that determined interpretations of Scriptura, and what is most important had developed critical thinking.100 Any debate of such nature can easily lead to splits and internal dissents, something that was in the nature of Reformation, however, when it later came to relying upon oneself, trusting the fellow community when it came to making crucial decisions, thence, the Protestant self-governing abilities had to be developed. Napoleon Roussel argued that Englishmen had certain principles for self-governance, so giving them the great compliment and noting this nature of self-reliance when it came to making independent decisions.101 Let’s take a look at the very term ‘congregationalist’. The Christian meaning in its theological sense is more or less understandable, it means an independent gathering of a group of Christians. However, this Reformed tradition was really formed out of independent communities that managed to govern themselves without being ordered from Rome or London. They were seen as a threat to the Church of England and the English crown until the Declaration of Indulgence of 1687, and the Toleration Act of 1689.102 It may be asked, was it merely theological interpretation of the Biblical verses that led to such fears on the side of the government? Presbyterians in Scotland were also not in the best position until the above-mentioned established regulations, and referred to the rule of James II as the ‘killing time’. However, the fear was presumably arriving from this ability to self-govern, capabilities to stand as a separate Church organization that formed it’s own dogmatics and interpretations, but also managed to govern the community around this separate Church or better to say Churches. Congregationalists did not believe in

100 See Bernard Ramm, Protestant Biblical Interpretation: A Textbook of Hermeneutics, (Baker Books, 1999). 101 Napoleon Roussel, Catholic and Protestant Nations Compared: In Their Threefold Relations to Wealth, Knowledge, and Morality, Volumes 1-2, (John P. Jewett, 1855) at p. 38. 102 A.A. Seaton, The Theory of Toleration under the later Stuarts, (Cambridge University Press, 1911) at p. 181. 37

one centralized system of controlling their communities, though each church community has its own rights to self regulate and control.103 The Church of England broke away from Rome, but not there were groups that managed to live on their own, gather together without consent from other groups, and what is most important, take their own decisions. At the same time, each Congregational church/community was not ruled by some hereditary dictator, but by the elders that were chosen from the most experienced and respected members of the community. In comparison, each Masonic Lodge chooses its own Worshipful Master [chair of the lodge] and officers such as Wardens and Deacons that help him to run the lodge totally independent from other Lodges.

III

Masonic Jurisdictional Structure

At this point, it is peculiar to discuss the Lodge structure, especially after making the discussion on the self-organizing capabilities of many Protestant communities. Freemasonry is not a religion, however, it possesses certain aspects of a religion that has no specific boundaries or its own theology. The first thing which falls into the eyes is the presence of the term ‘temple’. What does it really mean, and why an organization that technically forbids the discussion of any religion during its Ritual works/labors may call the building or just a room where these works are carried out in the Temple? Masonic lodges [district or Grand Lodges] are quite independent from each one, they correspond only to the District Lodge, and further to the Grand Committee of Officers in the Grand Lodge, but there is no clear evidence if the District Lodge was in any form of obedience to the other Lodges in the given district. This structure is similar to many Dissent groups such as Congregationalists. Going back to the question of religion in Freemasonry, sometimes Lodges or actually their temples could serve as the places for sermons carried out by some Protestant religious groups. One such sermon took place in 1844 in Texas on Fast Day by the Church of Disciples and performed by James Freeman Clarke. It was created during the Second Great Awakening and the Restoration Movement in North America, this Church was basically tolerant and looked for an ecumenical approach starting with its creation in the 1830s.104 J.F. Clarke was giving a sermon on the current political agenda in the United States, questioning the moral issues of the annexation of Texas, free States, and slaveholding States, in other words, he was discussing politics while representing the religious organization/community. It speaks for two things, first Freemasons, at least in that particular lodge were quite tolerant, second the Church of Disciples was tolerant and accepting towards the Freemasonry, the first being clearly Protestant. Most likely that would not be possible in the Catholic temple. Also, it may be logical to presume that many members of that Church, specifically in that given area, were Freemasons and vice versa. Mutual toleration and recognition of this kind is showing that Freemasons and Protestants could share similar thoughts in politics or religion despite the fact that both were not the same organization, structurally or ideologically. Freemasons as much as Congregationalists or Baptists are capable

103 Timothy D. Son, Ritual Practices in Congregational Identity Formation, (Lexington Books, 2014) at p. 120. 104 See James Freeman Clarke, The Annexation of Texas. A Sermon Delivered in the Masonic Temple on Fast Day, (Office of the Christian World, 1844). 38

of ruling themselves without being told what to do from the imaginable structural center; certain orders and directives better known as reports come from the Grand Lodge, however, other Grand Lodge jurisdictions have no rights to get involved in the business of other jurisdictions. Its global structure is way more amorphic and is based on mutual recognition. Similar types of mutual recognition can be found among the Orthodox Churches where more old and respected Patriarchal jurisdiction is recognizing more young Churches by granting them the autocephaly or the right to govern themselves. In the Masonic structure, this recognition belongs to the oldest one - the United Grand Lodges of England. They play the role of the Patriarchate of Constantinople in the Masonic world, thus, after they provide recognition, then most likely all other Grand Lodges in the world will recognize the given Grand Lodge. Prior to the establishment of the Grand Lodge, local lodges are called Provincial and correspond to a foreign Grand Lodge(s).105

Anti-Masonic Sentiments in Britain

However, not everything was without problems in Britain and there were issues that cannot be omitted or forgotten. Protestant country is not a free pass to the fraternity of Freemasons all the time, and many adherents to various Protestant denominations did not always accept it. For example, in the Netherlands or Denmark authorities were checking the loyalty of this organization, and in the latter country King Frederik I had first prohibited the organization under the penalty of death [seven years later the ban was lifted].106 In Britain, there were no mass prosecutions or detainment, but some were not sympathizing with the organization. In Samuel Prichard’s Masonry Dissected [1730] that included thirty-two pages, the fraternity is described in detail showing that the author was most likely aware of it, and possessed a lot of insider information. It brought so much criticism upon it that it was reissued many times during the following decades bringing a lot of negative attention to the Grand Lodge of England.107 Later publication of Jachin and Boaz by William Morgan in 1762 [London] brought even more criticism upon the Freemasons in England and caused some slight uproar and gossip in certain social layers, who were literate enough to read a script, and the publication was so big that later it even followed the fraternity across the Atlantic.108 It brought a lot of later rumors and talks, especially among those who did not read at all, that Freemasons are involved in corruption and sinister acts that have purely anti-Christian goals. Something that was brought upon them as an accusation from one century to the other without a lot of changes.

105 A Masonic Review, Volume 74, (C. Moore, 1891) at p. 114. 106 R.L. Tafel, Documents Concerning the Life and Character of Emanuel Swedenborg, (Swedenborg Society, British and Foreign, 1890) at p. 737. 107 William Preston Vaughn, The Anti-Masonic Party in the United States: 1826-1843, (University Press of Kentucky, 2009) at p. 12. 108 Ibid., p. 12-13. 39

James Anderson and Other Famous and Influential Early Freemasons

James Anderson

The figure of this man is possibly one of the most important in the history of Freemasonry. It may be already presumed that without his role in this organization, it would not have become the way it's known to the world today. As it was noted previously, James Anderson was a Scottish Presbyterian minister and specialized in the history of the Royal genealogies since King Solomon [‘Royal Genealogies, or the Genealogical Tables of Emperors, Kings, and Princes from Adam to these times’] and practiced law.109 It means he was aware of the Bible not only as a pastor, but also as a historian, then no doubt why Freemasonry possesses so many allegories with the Temple of Solomon, Pillars of the Temple [Jachin and Boaz], and the famous King himself. In this study, it is believable and quite rational to insist on the fact that this particular person was behind the central idea of the Temple in Freemasonry. Surely, as it was argued in the previous paragraphs, an idea could also belong to Templars, however, this issue remains debatable even among Masons themselves, but also has the right to exist. Historians have three facts, J. Anderson was a pastor [Presbyterian church pastor, Swallow Street, Piccadilly, London, and a Chaplain in his Lodge] and there is no question that to him the studies in Bible and religion were scrupulously important. Second, he was very well-read in the history of the Bible [his Genealogies were published with the financial assistance from the Earl of Egmont].110 Third, he was the D.D., Doctor of Divinity, which meant that he was not merely a pastor, but also an honorary theologian, who was once again very knowledgeable in the Scripture and letters.111 He was chosen to be the author of the Constitution of Freemasons, the first legal Masonic document that was supposed to govern recently (as of 1723) installed Grand Lodge of England. His knowledge was well recognized by the Duke of Montagu, who was the Grand Master, and the order to write the featured Masonic Constitution came particularly from this noble figure. James Anderson had technically become one of the most famous Freemasons due to this achievement and this document is also often known as the James Anderson’s Constitution(s). Undoubtedly, it became the first document of its kind and most likely the first Constitution, which contained articles and was carrying such a title, before the American Constitution or any other. For this reason, he may often be mixed with the lawyer [there was another Scottish James Anderson born in 1662, a real lawyer and antiquary], and due to the lack of materials some actually are ought to think so, but he surely became the first ‘Masonic lawyer’ of his kind by compiling the base for the Masonic regulations.112

109 The Freemasons’ Magazine and Masonic Mirror, Volume 21, (Brother Henry George Warren, 2, Red Lion Court, Fleet Street, 1869) at p. 252. 110 Ibid., p. 252. 111 The Freemason’s Monthly Magazine, Volume 30, (Tuttle & Dennett, 1871) at p. 183. 112 Ars Quatuor Coronatorum: Being the Transactions of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge # 2076, London, Volume 6, (W.J. Parre H, Limited 1893) at p. 135. 40

What particularly draws attention is his belonging to the Presbyterian Church and obviously, there was no dissonance to him when belonging to both organizations, and in return, both of these organizations did not have anything against him being in both of them. His Masonic Charges are also of great importance and portray the ancient traditions, history, and rituals of the Freemasons. They were published slightly earlier than the Constitution in 1721 and show another interesting thing [presumably the earlier version of the Constitution(s)].113 This study may insist on the theory that James Anderson was one of the most important historical figures who has played a crucial role in inventing the speculative Freemasonry the world knows today, and linking it to the stonemasons [operative masons], building fraternities and even Templars [including Biblical stories taken from the Old Testament]. In other words, the real Freemasons nowadays did not begin during the Egyptians or the king Solomon, or directly belong to the heritage of the Rosslyn Chapel, but were linked to it all, and J. Anderson was one of the most important figures in doing so. This point of view may be argued, denied, or supported by other historians and writers. The author Emmanuel Rebold in his book A General History of Freemasonry in Europe discussed ancient Egypt and Greece referring to Freemasonry as directly inheriting its traditions, and even though he distinguishes the speculative and operative Masons, to him it was one tradition since its foundation in 715 BC.114 His history seems to be objective when discussing medieval colleges and fraternities and was not drawn by mysticism and inventions, but to him, this organization was not founded in 1717. Another actual author who was also making this ancient history of the Freemasons was no one else, but J. Anderson himself. His Constitutions and Charges included in them include this long-lasting story of the ancient brotherhood, and it became the source of later speculations on the organization’s very old that started way back during ancient Greece and the Temple of Solomon history.115 Additionally, it should be noted that James Anderson was the man of Enlightenment and the Age of Reason, he was trying to remove all the religious discussions from the speculative lodge, but at the same time remained the Presbyterian minister. Such a position could be declared by a high level of tolerance towards anyone, who shared the belief in the Supreme Being and was tolerant in return. While looking at the early pages of the Constitution it becomes obvious that irreligious people cannot join Freemasonry, and they should believe in the Grand Architect of the Universe, the force which may include many different names of a God worshipped by each member of the lodge.116 The term GAOTU was partially introduced into the philosophical and theological vocabulary by St. Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica and John Calvin in his Institutes of the Christian Religion.117 The concept of Deism is very obvious in the articles that mention the Supreme Being or the Grand Architect of the Universe. Simultaneously, again he was the Presbyterian minister and put Calvinism alongside with the Freemasonry in his life and work.

113 Augustus Row, Masonic Biography and Dictionary, (J.B. Lippincott & Company, 1868) at p. 62. 114 Emmanuel Rebold, A General History of the Freemasonry in Europe, (Geo. B. Fessenden, 1867) at pp. 30- 32. 115 James Anderson, The Constitutions of the Free-Masons, pp. 18-20. 116 Ibid., pp. 1-10. 117 Haris Dimitriadis, Epicurus and the Pleasant Life, (Lulu.com, 2018) at p. 305. 41

John Theophilus Desaguliers

This prominent figure was a typical model of the educated and enlightened person during the late sixteenth and early eighteenth centuries in France and England. His polymathic talents were surely reflected upon the Masonic concept of the seven Noble Arts and it must be said that particularly such people have created Freemasonry [alongside with the educated nobles such as Duke of Montagu, and writers like J. Anderson]. John Desaguliers was born in France in 1683 but was brought up in Britain due to his family’s Huguenot origin [Protestant, Calvinist]. Once again a figure born in the official Catholic France in the Protestant community was brought up in Anglican Britain after 1687/1689 Acts of Indulgence and Toleration, when Protestants of almost all denominations could be free to worship. Later the very same person joined Freemasonry pulling yet another link between the Protestant state, French Huguenot refugees, and Freemasonry that was using the Constitution written by the Presbyterian minister. These links and bonds are crucial for this work and get to the point when they all get together in order to show a wider picture of the discussed topic. John’s father was the Huguenot (Protestant) minister, who left France after the re-establishment of the Edict of Nantes (1683), founder of the French school in England, and most likely had a profound effect on the young Desagulier due to the traditions of education in the family because latter was sent to Oxford to further expand his studies.118 Himself he was also following his father’s footsteps and was ordained as a deacon and later as a priest [Anglican]. It makes this person even more unique, he was incorporating Anglicanism, Freemasonry, and science in his life. Certainly, it may be argued that later participation in the Masonic lodge was the place to get away from national or denominational identities, assisting in the process of cultural unification despite having various ethnic or religious origins. To someone like John Desagulier it was twice as important because of his French origins, even though he was brought to England as a child, still he could probably feel more comfortable among the people that at least try to put their identities aside. Moreover, he could be thinking about more of those principles that could link science and his knowledge in mathematics to the concepts of Deism that was quite obvious in Freemasonry, particularly when it comes to geometry and the idea of the Grand Architect of the Universe. He was not just an ordinary member of the first Grand Lodge, but had also participated in its beginnings, the Masonic collection of literature articles related to this organization edited by John W. Simons and Robert Macoy in the 1860s, alludes to Desagulier as follows:

SAVERIEN also mentions. “that besides his other writings, a work on Freemasonry is ascribed to him.” Allusion is here probably intended to the “Book of Constitutions,” 1723, and to “An Eloquent Oration on Masons and Masonry,” delivered by him on the 24th June, 1721, on the occasion of the installation of the Duke of Montagu as Grand Master.119

118 Edited by John W. Simons and R. Macoy, The Masonic Eclectic: Or, Gleanings from the Harvest Field of Masonic Literature, Band 1, Ausgaben 1-12, (Masonic Publishing and Manufacturing Company, 1865) at p. 189. 119 Ibid., p. 190. 42

It sets him at the center of the early growing Masonic organization and it may be peculiar to contemplate on the fact that his presence was advocating the expanding intellectual force of Freemasonry. It did not merely include people of power, but was from the beginning literally collecting those, who could shape the intellectual map of Europe and later the world. His presence in Hague that he had visited in 1731 and later decided to stay there was working in two directions. First, the scientist could share his knowledge and experience with his continental counterparts. Second, it assisted the cause of Freemasonry, which at that point began to spread around continental Europe, and brought a lot of attention within the noble circles. Here is what Charles Holzendorf, the secretary to the English Ambassador, Earl of Chesterfield wrote on the initiation of Francis, Duke of Lorraine:

...an excellent, sober character, generally applauded by everybody here [... and] the Pattern of a complete young Prince and Gentleman. He has met here with Dr. Desaguillier, to whole publick lectures he goes without any constraint and hears them very attentively. He professes himself a great admirer and friend of the English Nation and is learning the English tongue with such an application that he carries and English Grammar in his pocket.120

It was all happening in the circle of true gentlemen and free-thinkers, who have admired philosophy and science. What was the key moment is that many of them have belonged to the circles of power and could truly influence social changes, growth, or politics. Generally, Freemasonry is not supposed to be directly involved in politics, it’s forbidden by the Anderson’s Constitutions, moreover, each Mason should uphold the laws of the country in which he lives. However, if the people who can influence politics are members of any lodge, and really can shape the circumstances around them, then their own intellectual progress will inevitably lead to such a change in the society along the lines of humanism that is encrypted in the Masonic allegories and symbols. It is very important to understand that all these early Freemasons belonged to this concept of unity between science, thought, and intellectualism, something that this society was always seeking as its ideal. It was happening in the 1720s and 1730s, before that period when esotericism, Rosicrucianism, and certain elements of the alchemical thoughts began to enter that organization. Also includes Martinists or such figures as Giuseppe Cagliostro who probably influenced the introduction of certain elements of the occult into Freemasonry. On the other hand, some authors such as Henrik Bogdan in his book Western Esotericism and Rituals of Initiation argue that the admiration of the Rosicrucian ideas back in the seventeenth century was already the factor that led to the creation of such societies as Freemasonry.121

It all may be very peculiar to notice that the above-mentioned initiation at which Dr. Desagulier was presented in the protestant Hague, not Toledo where anything of that nature would be seriously not welcomed by the Inquisition and Spanish monarchy. The latter point does not mean that the Catholic world did not produce intellectualism, it may be possible to mention that the Jesuit revival, scholastic tradition, and many other concepts and innovations

120 Audrey T. Carpenter, John Theophilus Desagulier: A Natural Philosopher, Engineer, and Freemason in Newtonian England, (Bloomsbury Publishing, 2011) at p. 47. 121 Henrik Bodan, Western Esotericism and Rituals of Initiation, (SUNY Press, 2012) at p. 24. 43

within the Catholic Church have managed a lot of achievements. For that matter, it may be recommended to check the book composed by James Kelly and Hannah Thomas, Jesuit Intellectual and Physical Exchange between England and Mainland Europe, c. 1580-1789.122 At that point, it is very true that Protestantism and Freemasonry among which there were so many Calvinists could actually exist in the Protestant world having no legal issues with the authorities. Notably, Desagulier was an admirer of Newtonian concepts in philosophy and science. Often it’s rumored that Isaac Newton himself had participated in the Freemasonry, however, there is no clear or any evidence supported by the documents that he actually was its member. Nevertheless, Newtonian ideas propagated and popularized by such people as Desagulier have made an impact and created the algorithm of exchange between Freemasonry, the curious public, and progressive ideas. Desagulier and those who were closely related to him in Freemasonry or who were his teachers and students were intricately interconnected with science that included everything from astronomy and geometry. For example, his mentor John Keill was the contemporary of Newton, an astronomer, natural philosopher, and mathematician, who was directly influencing John Desagulier. It may be somewhat thought that Keill had belonged to the English Freemasonry, when it was already in existence in its speculative form, but before the installation of the Grand Lodge of England. Nevertheless, what may be known for sure is that the profound influence on Freemasonry was coming from science and intellect. Desagulier had implemented his method and ideas in science and mathematics, therefore, has influenced his worldview and in return, the latter was able to influence Freemasonry. Particularly, the idea of methodology taken from Keill [Anglican from Scotland] by Desagulier was mentioned by Richard A. Berman in his Doctoral Thesis.123

III

Francis, Duke of Lorraine. Holy Roman Emperor

Francis I was probably the most important figure when it comes to the figures of power and Freemasonry. Such people were making it popular among the ruling elites of Europe during that time and were directly linking it to the scientific and philosophical intellectualism of the day. Through Dr. Desagulier and his entourage, or figures similar to him who were arriving from England to continental Europe the Freemasonry began to spread further and began to catch more attention from people as the Duke of Lorraine. At the time of initiation, he was known so only to become the Holy Roman emperor later in his life adding to the list of monarchs who were Freemasons. Figures like him had an influence on the general legalization of Freemasonry, mostly in the Protestant countries including Catholic France, but due to the status of the Holy Roman Emperor [and figures similar to Francis], who was responsible also for the Catholic lands in central and western Europe, it was spreading among Catholic nobility, too. Francis I was Catholic himself and the fact did not halt him from becoming the Freemason in 1731 during the time when John Desagulier was in Hague. These early Masonic personalities

122 See James E. Kelly, Hannah Thomas, Jesuit Intellectual and Physical Exchange between England and Mainland Europe, c. 1580-1789, (BRILL, 2018). 123 Richard A. Berman, The Architects of Eighteenth Century English Freemasonry 1720-1740, (University of Exeter, 2010) at p. 80 44

are crucial to understand the nature of Freemasonry, its relation to Protestantism, science, humanism, and tolerance. Francis was famous for being very loyal to his new brotherhood and has kept the oath for the rest of his life. He was initiated to the Degree of Master Mason the same year in Haughton Hall during his visit to England, he had later established the Lodge Drein Kanonen in Vienna and was one of its first members.124 Symbolically the highest degree in Freemasonry, apart from the High Degrees that were developed later on and are not part of the Craft Masonry which include only 3 Degrees. This political figure in the European, German and Austrian history made an impact on the Enlightenment and generally made Freemasonry protected in the Austrian Empire [under the authority of the most symbolic figure of the Holy Roman Emperor]. His marriage to Maria Theresia brought him the Holy Emperor’s crown and it turned to be mutual luck for the country and the man who was co-ruling it. Francis’s position was important during Maria Theresia’s forty years of successful reign and one of the reasons why she was tolerant and has raised her son, the future emperor Joseph II, in the liberal direction was due to his enlightened stature. History knows a few events that even after becoming the Holy Roman Emperor he was saving Freemasonry, which had a lot of enemies in the Catholic Austrian Empire, and one such occasion seems to be quite peculiar because he was the target, too. Once in 1754 one hundred Grenadiers broke into the Lodge in order to arrest its members, who numbered twelve people, but the emperor had managed to run away merely due to the presence of the back staircase. Eventually, in a few days, all twelve Masonic brothers of the Emperor were set free.125 It means that there were forces inside the government or clergy that did not favor Freemasonry, keeping the belief that this organization is somewhat plotting against Austria and the Church. However, it worked in such a direction that the Emperor was in charge, so it created somewhat dual positioning in the state, one side was often not aware of the other. His children, future emperor Joseph II and Caroline, queen of Naples were tolerant toward the organization and the first even became its member. The establishment of lodges in the Catholic Austria made it possible to show an example to many other Catholic countries nearby, which were developing their own Masonic traditions taken directly from England [Polish-Lithuanian state before its partitioning, then Hungary as part of the Austrian Empire].

John, Second Duke of Montagu

This figure is often associated with being the first noble person in Freemasonry, but the fact is probably speaking for the first person of his particular noble status, not titled nobility could be part of Freemasonry before him. Nevertheless, this friend of philosophers, scientists, who liked some degree of humor was invited sometime before 1720 and quite soon was elevated to the position of Grand Master in 1721 becoming the fraternity's influential friend and contributor. Protestant noble, of course, he unlike Desaguiler, seemingly was not very religious but was interested in all sorts of peculiar things, and Freemasonry was one of them. Thus, he was one of the founders of this organization, who stood behind the creation of the first

124 Adolph F. Woodford, Kenning's masonic cyclopaedia and handbook of masonic archaeology, history, and biography, (Kenning, 1878) p. 234. 125 Ibid., p. 234. 45

Masonic Constitution, he ordered James Anderson to fulfill the task. He had participated in many Masonic events that are considered to be the beginnings of the fraternity, and his role was very significant. Particularly its known that the St. John’s Festival was already an important celebration among the Freemasons’s way back during the 1720s. Here is an excerpt from one of the Masonic documents that have recorded the presence of Montagu during the mentioned celebration, and recited in J.G. Findel’s History of Freemasonry.

When the feast was concluded, and grace had been said, the past Grand Master Payne made the first procession round the Hall, and having returned to his place, he proclaimed aloud James Duke of Montagu his successor for the ensuing year, and having invested His Grace with the ensigns of his office, installed him in the Solomon’s Chair, placing himself at his right hand, while the assembly acknowledged the authority of the Duke with all due homage, and joyful congratulations at the re-establishment of Masonry in all its splendour.126

It shows his high position in the early Freemasonry, the position which assisted the growing popularity of the fraternity among other nobles, and therefore, people who were important, but also not of nobility. John Desagulier was part of this first group of English Freemasons alongside the Duke and many of his English noble friends. It must be noted that Freemasonry, having a particular tolerable position in Protestant England, Holland, and countries where monarchs or nobles were in favor of it became popular, not necessarily in the same sense people talk about the mode of dress, however, it indeed was gaining popularity as something attractive. The sense of uniqueness, to some it appeared slightly sinister, to others pious, to many it was progressive with the opportunity to move on using its social lift. Nobody really knows the feelings of other men, but it was obvious that Freemasonry became the club of gentlemen and those who admired progressive ideas, despite all the possibilities of social elevation, ability to find friends, or just spend time. Also, J.G. Findel described the ending of the St. John’s Ritual labor in the Lodge, which included so many prominent figures of the day that were already mentioned in this work before.

When the Grand Master Montagu, with his Brethren in Office, had made a second procession round the Hall, Brother Desaguliers made an elegant oration on the subject of Masonry, Perfect concord and harmony, the effect of brotherly love, prevailed, and then the Grand Master thanked Br. Villenau for his able manner in which the Festival had been arranged by him, and commanded him, in his capacity of Warden, to close the Lodge at the proper time.127

Notably, the title of Warden was immediately part of the Masonic officer’s organization, the same as was used back during the time of guilds. One old tradition was literally re-established by the other and it was directly connected to the progressive or higher social layers making this fraternity available for people as Duke of Montagu or Dr. Desaguiler, who were different, in fact, but became united by the whole concept of Freemasonry. The unity despite all the odds or religious intolerance, different ideas, political camps, and social status was abridged by the idea of Fraternity without such borders, possibly this and merely this turned to be the most appealing in it. During the earlier chapters, it was discussed that during

126 J.G. Findel, History of Freemasonry, p. 144. 127 Ibid, p. 145. 46

the religious conflicts in Europe and Britain it was very important to find some sort of a solid base, some concept that would get through these differences and bring the idea of progressive peace. Humanists such as Erasmus were reaching out to the most educated and humane representatives of the Reformation and Catholic Church to make changes in order to get to the improvements, but wars continued even though there were progressive people in both religious camps. Eventually, the Freemasonry that was way more tolerated among the Protestants in England began to take shape with the idea of this thought of unity based on reason and geometry, Euclidean universal concepts, and generally drew the human mind towards scientific approach.128 It became attractive to people who already had everything in life, Duke of Montagu did not look after convenient connections to lift his social value, but certainly wanted something more special or progressive to at least spend time with interesting and intellectually grown acquaintances and friends. It was not without drawbacks right from the beginning due to intrigues, possibly jealousy of who is going to be the next Grand Master or the senior officer in the Grand Lodge because human factor always exists and there is no way it will ever be eliminated from any organization or fraternity established by human beings. For example, the same J.G. Findel cited an excerpt from the lodge records that shows this level of natural human experience:

In the beginning of January 1722, the Duke of Montagu was chosen again as Grand Master for the following year. The Duke of Wharton and his adherents were highly displeased at this, it having been intended to put up the latter nobleman as a candidate. Therefore the Duke of Wharton caused himself to be proclaimed Grand Master, in an assembly which he had convoked for this purpose, a choice which of course was greatly disapproved of by the regular Lodges, it being considered by them as contrary to their constitution.129

That quarrel ended well, the Duke of Montagu had resigned while understanding his misconduct and mutual respect had prevailed among the regular Lodges. It was due in many ways to the level of honor which was important to people gathered in Freemasonry at that time, and what is most important they were setting up necessary standards for the functioning of this fraternity.

Philip Wharton, First Duke of Wharton

Another nobleman during the beginning of the society of Freemasons was playing a role of authority so necessary for the establishment of any serious and respectable organization. This young man was not destined to live until old age, he was proclaimed the Duke by George I merely when Philip was nineteen years old. Jacobite due to his connection to the Old Pretender for the English throne James Francis Edward Stuart, whom he met during his visits to Switzerland and France, seemed to be very energetic and prone to political intrigue. One of his mentors was a strict Calvinist [another connection to Freemasonry] who most likely had a

128 Albert Gallatin Mackay, An Encyclopædia of Freemasonry and Its Kindred Sciences, (L.H. Everts, 1889) at p. 309. 129 J.G. Findel, History of Freemasonry, p. 146. 47

profound influence on Philip, however, as it often happens the influence was sort of mixed with resentment because of the mentor’s strict ways that according to his own memoirs, - he took so much Disgust at the severe, dry moral Precepts of his Governor, and the restraints endeavored to be laid upon him.130 Nevertheless, the presence of yet another Calvinist somewhere around the early and influential Freemason, who was literally standing at the very beginnings of this fraternal organization is worth noticing. Peculiarly, he was also directly connected to continental Europe, and it seems, as most of the first famous Brethren he was participating in travels that were important in spreading of Freemasonry among the representatives of the educated class. His personal interest in clubs or social meetings was first noted in Philip’s presence in the so- called ‘Hellfire Club’, in which it may be thought to be located in the areas where people could have much fun because as he recalled it, - that the spirit of the brew-house and the beer-shop still pervades.131 It also shows that many young men, scholars and generally speaking peculiar people that enjoyed innovations longed for such meetings and wanted to establish societies with secrets where they could share their ideas, and, most likely feel free from the everyday political or denominational conflicts. Also, it seems that in England at that time social life of this sort was growing fast and Freemasonry was not the only organization, but it may be discussed in detail later on. Philip Wharton, the First Duke of Wharton was ambitious and often hasty in his acts. It was recorded in one of the Masonic records [minutes] and recalled by J.W.S. Mitchell in the History of Freemasonry and Masonic Digest. It also shows the intrigue between the Duke of Wharton and the Duke of Montagu [already mentioned before]. The majority of brothers wanted Montagu to stay as their Grand Master due to his abilities to manage the Lodge, however, his counterpart the Duke of Wharton stood in the way and had gathered his own group of Masons at Stationer’s Hall on June 24, 1722, thus delaying the St. John’s Festival.132 If two ambitious characters meet together in one place, often they begin to rival for the authority and leadership, the situation of Wharton was obviously true about his character. His diplomat’s career full of intrigues and travels was always worthy of a romance blistering with love letters and secret plots against his opponents. First, he was on the side of Jacobites, later denouncing the cause in 1731 just before his death, mistrusted by Austrians on his mission there, and being a member of the Order of the Garter he was the typical character of his century. Eccentric it may be said, he could not stay still, wanting popularity and wine, he died young in 1731 in Spain, Catalonia, presumably from his excesses with alcohol. He was even accused of being a traitor to England for working together with the Pretender James Stuart.

Sir Robert, however, who had by this time preferred against him an indictment for high treason, refused to receive any application from him; and thereupon Wharton made fresh vows of fidelity to the Pretender, and begged and got some money from that court. After wandering about Europe with a numerous but ragged retenue of servants, he went again to Spain, where his whole stock

130 Philip Wharton, Duke of Wharton, Memoirs of the life of ... Philip ... Duke of Wharton. By an impartial hand, (London, Printed for J. Wilford, behind the Chapter-House, in St. Paul’s Church-yard, 1731) at p. 7. 131 Philip Wharton, Almæ Matres: Dedicated, Without Permission, to the Freshmen and Dons of Oxford, (J. Hogg & Sons, 1859) at p. 261. 132 J.W.S. Mitchell, The History of Freemasonry and Masonic Digest [...] to which are Added the Old Charges and Ancient Regulations as Collated by Order of the Grand Lodge of England, in 1722, Volume 1, (Published by the author, 1859) at p. 243. 48

was one shirt, one cravat and 500 livres. To save him from starving, the Spanish court gave him the command of a regiment at Lerida133

This quote shows the Duke of Wharton as someone who did not count money, could shatter his reputation with intrigues, but also concentrate less on one particular subject or place. It may be presumed that he could not spend a lot of time in the English Freemasonry or other Lodges in Europe unless they were serving his ambitious interests. Of course, it’s difficult to make hasty judgments while being so far away in time, the mistake which is so often made by historians, however, he was most likely using Freemasonry. On the other hand, he did participate in the establishment of it and possibly opened many doors and opportunities for the organization, but he was not very constant with his beliefs and behavior. At the same time it should not be said that the Duke of Wharton was completely bad so to speak, he was also that particular character, which is capable of getting things done or pushing them forward. This kind of personality is often needed to change the world, so it does not stay the same.

Francis Scott, Second Duke of Buccleuch - Earl of Dalkeith

A few more words can be said about this notable Scottish noble, who graduated from the Eton College and later in life the honorary Doctor of Oxford in 1745.134 He was particularly an educated person with great interests in science and innovations, something that was corresponding with the era, the notion that was specifically popular among many Freemasons in England. He was drawn to this fraternity by the curiosity to explore new horizons, and not merely out of boredom, but seemingly for the wish to acquiescent figures with similar strives to learn. He is often known as well as someone who attained the Fellowship of the Royal Society given to men who made a contribution to science, mathematics and the general knowledge of nature. Francis Scott is the perfect example of a link between the noble world and scientists, scholars of the day, and notably both ‘worlds’ could meet in the Masonic lodge. Probably this was the biggest achievement of Freemasonry then and later on, too. So, redrawing social barriers was possible due to the fact that inside this fraternity such borders do not really exist, all brethren are meeting on the level, the concept which allegorically means that they are all equal despite their position in the profane world and are ready to give assistance to each other. Thus, Francis Scott, James Anderson, Dr. Desaguiler, or the Duke of Montagu could talk to each other, develop the Masonic operative ritual, write their fraternal Constitution, make allegorical concepts and simply talk without being taken apart by the worldly statuses or social differences.

133 George Lillie Craik, The Pictorial History of England: Being a History of the People: As Well as a History of the Kingdom, (C. Knight, 1855) at pp. 387-388. 134 University of Oxford, Alumni Oxonienses: The Members of the University of Oxford, 1715-1886, Volumes 3- 4, (Parker and Company, 1888) at p. 1265. 49

It is in this Respect only that all the human Race stand upon a Level, having all the same Wants and Desires, and are all in the same Need of each others Assistance, as by this common Cement every one is bound to look upon himself as a Member of this Universal Community.135

The Second Duke of Buccleuch was the man of Enlightenment, someone who looked for progress and found it in different areas including Freemasonry. It’s not necessary to say that he belonged to the Anglican Church, as much as his forefathers in the seventeenth century carrying all the baggage of the Protestant England at that time, but without those virulent characteristics that could be found in the Duke of Wharton. Additionally, he was serving as the Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of England from 1723 until 1724.136 By that time he had succeeded the Duke of Wharton possibly due to the latter’s lack of permanent interest in the undertaking or because the latter was too eccentric for the rest of brethren in the Grand Lodge. However, it appears to be quite certain that Francis Scott was more balanced when it came to the ruling of the lodge, and it’s not a coincidence why he was elected after his very talented, but prone to intrigue predecessor. What is certain and can be drawn as the conclusion is that he proves the connection between the educated class, nobles, Anglican family traditions which have certainly existed in his particular family, and the fraternity of Freemasons.

Early Freemasonry in France, the Netherlands, Germany, and Scandinavia

France

The country that is going to be discussed in this article is France and it was not considered to be Protestant, but often it seems to be the second after England when the topic comes to Freemasonry and particularly the latter’s links to Huguenots. This country is famous for its Freemason traditions and while not being Protestant it will take more than one page to analyze it. It was previously concluded that freedom is necessary to preachers, no religious monopoly is possible if everyone needs a voice, and out of this need to give equal freedom, it logically develops laws that guarantee that freedom everyone needs. This notion became obvious in England during James II’s rule when he decided to pass the Act of Indulgence in 1687 that guaranteed freedom to his fellow Catholics, but also it gave the right to Dissenters, too. In France, such changes did not take place, and the Catholic Church was able to sustain its power monopoly, particularly curving the country’s nobles. Infamous attacks on the Huguenot [Calvinist] strongholds such as one in La Rochelle or Catherine de Medici’s bloody attempt to destroy the denomination during the St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre made the rest of them flee France, so only a few remained. She felt threatened by Protestants not only ideologically, but also dynastically, so all possible blame went against the group which she hypocritically

135 Robert Peter, British Freemasonry, 1717-1813, (Routledge, 2016) at p. 32. 136 J.G. Findel, History of Freemasonry, p. 148. 50

claimed to be her friends [Conde, Coligni]137 Some went to the new world, others to different corners of Europe where they could feel free [England, Prussia]. This pre-history is important to show the difference from the developments that took place in England, Scotland, or Wales where the Reformation took place and began to create the system very different from the one that existed in France until 1789, after which groups such as Huguenots were legalized, but also they were granted with partial rights after the Edict of Toleration issued by Louis XVI.138 Parliament was not forming, religious equality laws were not even on the horizon, and the only issue that could be balancing this disposition of France politically and socially was the Age of Reason and later the Enlightenment which was developing in there despite the lack of the above-mentioned freedoms. Descartian thought was part of this process and his studies in philosophy, mathematics and geometry would later on be very visible in some Freemasonic concepts at least theoretically, and his presence in the Age of Reason was remarkable. When looking at the more medieval times it should be mentioned that France as the rest of Europe was forming guilds and this country was no different from England at that point. The French guilds surely had their own traditions distinct from Britain, but also echoed the later Masonic principle to accept men of good reputation and good standing in the society. Neither England nor France were different when it came to the establishment of the professional societies. The following quote sounds very familiar to Anderson's Constitution(s) when it comes to the acceptance of new members, ...and in certain districts, he had to prove his identity, that he was of good and honest conduct, and that he had never been under any judicial sentence.139 It meant that entering the guild or the organization of this kind meant that no one with a bad reputation was able to do so, the same is still valid for every Masonic Lodge in the world. Guilds were based on a good reputation for many reasons, and the most important one seems to be a part of the business conduct that required the winning of customers, so other guilds or fraternities do not get to them first. Of course, this issue is not corresponding to Freemasonry because it’s not a business enterprise, but it was important to the guilds that preceded it. Generally speaking, the history of guilds in France is very similar to those in England with one serious difference that during the sixteenth century the latter underwent religious reforms and split from Rome, thus influencing the religious conception of any league; in France, they have required apprentices to be Catholic.140

However, the focus of attention must concentrate on Huguenots and English societies if studying the history of early Freemasonry in France. This issue directly connects two concepts together once again; Protestants and Freemasonry. Hence, religion in France was of Catholic faith and in Britain, it shifted to Anglicanism, including many different Protestant

137 Edward Parsons (the Younger), Histories of St. Bartholomew Day, (Halifax; sold by Holdsworth; Westley: London, 1824) at p. 4. 138 Bryan A. Banks, Erica Johnson, The French Revolution and Religion in Global Perspective: Freedom and Faith, an article by Bryan A. Banks, The Huguenot Diaspora and the Politics of Religion in Revolutionary France, (Springer, 2017) at p. 10. 139 Robert Freke Gould, The History of Freemasonry: Its Antiquities, Symbols, Constitutions, Customs, Etc. : Embracing an Investigation of the Records of the Organisations of the Fraternity in England, Scotland, Ireland, British Colonies, France, Germany and the United States : Derived from Official Sources, Volume 1, (J. Beacham, 1884) at p. 188. 140 Ibid., p. 188. 51

denominations such as Disseners, French Huguenots, who were Calvinists kept looking up to their northern neighbor. It was part of the great political game of the day, Protestants were persecuted in France during the counter-Reformation [Religious Wars and later under Richelieu] and during the very same time, Catholics were in the same situation in Britain. There was some sort of an exchange process that led to a duel between these two countries that were known for being counterparts since the battle of Hastings and later One Hundred Years War. As it was said before, Huguenots were trying to escape France and persecutions or at least search for some contacts elsewhere, the same was done by Catholics in England. Well-known John Toland who was mentioned in the previous chapters was supposedly somewhat linked to the formation of philosophical societies in England and continental Europe. Simon Harvey and Elizabeth Grist argue that London with its numerous coffee houses, numbering up to five hundred, was the place where people could read fresh London and Dutch newspapers, two of them Grecian and the Rainbow were the venues for Toland, and at the same time to those emigres or visitors form France, who were trying to escape the religious purges, among them could be found Huguenots, intellectuals, scholars and journalists.141 This issue is recommended to be seen as the key to the foundation of Freemasonry in France, via Huguenots and those who were in one way or another under pressure in the Ancien Regime France have brought this tradition to their home country. It did not take a lot of time because people are prone to exchange things of any kind including new ideas as quickly as the wind blows. Huguenots could feel way freer under the circumstances established in the Netherlands and England but were seen as traitors and English spies, while Catholics were seen as French or Spanish agents in England. This political exchange played an important role and may be compared to the Cold War, which once in a while was getting very hot. Once again it should be underlined that the culture of political, social, and philosophical clubs, societies in England was very popular, the age of guilds was going into the past with its professional skilled orientation, and gave rise to the new time where these social meetings became intricately important to the English society. Guilds gave organizational tradition including terminology and many symbols that were later used by Freemasons with the allegorical meaning. Previous chapters have discussed English guilds and the moment when they began to disappear and gave rise to the social fraternities such as Freemasons under the cap of Protestant monarchy, here that is also important to recall it again. The above-mentioned French Protestants and free-thinkers were arriving in England, particularly after the Glorious Revolution to breathe that social air. Peter Clark had specifically noted this fact in his work British Clubs and Societies 1580-1800.

The years after the Glorious Revolution saw the renewal of county meetings in the capital… Copying the Gentlemen Lovers of Music and their St. Cecilia Day entertainments, the stewards commissioned Henry Purcell and the popular poet Tom D’Urfey to produce a grand patriotic ode in praise of the county’s part in the Glorious Revolution.142

141 Edited by Anne Dunan-Page, The Religious Culture of the Huguenots, 1660-1750, an article by Simon Harvey and Elizabeth Grist, The Rainbow Coffee House and the Exchange of Ideas in Early Eighteenth-century England, (Ashgate Publishing, 2006) at p. 176. 142 Peter Clark, British Clubs and Societies 1580-1800: The Origins of an Associational World, (OUP Oxford, 2000) at p. 286. 52

This massive layer of the social discussion in clubs and fraternities was changing English society and was quickly noticed on the continent, particularly in France through the Huguenot dissidents and scholars who could disagree with the political situation in France. Another author Margaret Jacob argues that John Toland who was the founder of the Socratic Society in England, was also having a lot of connections in Europe, particularly the Hague, and as she wrote the original Masonic Lodge on the continent called Chevaliers de la Jubilation.143 Notably, the name of the Lodge was in French, directly linking it to the visitors or emigres from France. Authors Harvey and Grist also related to Jacob’s arguments saying that Toland had personally knew the victims of the religious persecutions, and protocols [minutes as they are known in the Masonic Lodges] of that Lodge were written by the well known Huguenot immigrant Prosper Marchand, and that all of those twenty-four men who put their signatures under the document were Huguenots, too.144 Holland was another place between England and France that was Protestant and gave rise to the French Freemasonry. Once again the Protestant polity was linking itself to the development of freedoms and thoughts that were prohibited or illegal in the Catholic world, which was not necessarily all politically backward and the given analysis should be objective, however, in the discussed area the Protestant countries turned to be more advanced in certain areas of life and friendly to fraternal groups including Freemasons. It may be claimed that French Protestant groups were involved in the spreading of the Masonic fraternity in France and certainly among the French emigres in the Netherlands, and without it the process could have taken way more time.

First historically documented Lodges began to originate in France during the 1720s, practically almost immediately after the first united Lodge in London was established in 1717. Holland was closely related and implemented in the process, most likely due to its Protestant orientation and political closeness to Britain. J.G. Findel is not very specific about it and traces the foundation to 1721, 1725, 1727, and even 1732 [seems to be the most doubtful year] and says that first accounts may be contradictory.145 At the same time, there are documents left probably by the Grand Lodge of France and are mentioned by Claude-Antoine Thory in his Histoire de la Fondation du Grand Orient de Paris [Grand Lodge of Paris; in Freemasonry, the Orient means the Lodge itself]. In there he wrote about three important figures [also mentioned by Findel relating to Thory], Lord Derwentwater, squire Maskeline, the lord de Heguetty that were accompanied by some other English representatives of the noble class, who have established presumably the first Lodge in the city of Paris, not ironically at the Hurre’s Tavern while receiving the real Masonic Warrant from England.146 It means that these noblemen that arrived from England were the first people to do so, however, there are other evidentiary sources about the first Masonic establishments in France. The same researcher J.G. Findel was relating to other sources, particularly to the register of the English Grand Lodge in London that the Lodge l’Anglaise # 204 was established in Bordeaux with the English

143 Margaret C. Jacob, The Radical Enlightenment Pantheists, Freemasons and Republicans, (London 1981) at p. 247. 144 Anne Dunan-Page, The Religious Culture of the Huguenots, 1660-1750, an article by Simon Harvey and Elizabeth Grist, The Rainbow Coffee House and the Exchange of Ideas in Early Eighteenth-century England, p. 176-177. 145 J.G. Findel, History of Freemasonry, p. 200. 146 Claude-Antoine Thory, Histoire de la Fondation du Grand Orient de Paris, (Paris, 1812) at pp. 10-11. 53

Constitution given to it in 1732 or possibly 1746.147 Also, Thory mentioned the Loge d’Aumont that existed since 1729 in Paris on rue De Bussy and was directly associated with Duke d’Amont.148 Though all this evidence is clear, but not that well supported by many sources it may be argued that the first historical Lodges were existing in France since 1725 [or at least 1729] and were established [often the verb ‘to install’ is used by Masons today]. Peculiarly and not without some element of humor it was connected to a Tavern, too. The whole tradition of meeting in coffee houses, taverns, and other places where people could meet and talk was popular in Britain and was well met in France, which had its own culture of meeting in salons and notable restaurants to read poetry, discuss political events and other issues. One English writer according to Theory was able to count twenty-two Lodges in Paris alone, and two hundred in all of France in 1742, but the latter did not really provide enough information on who the writer was and from which source did he get the information.149 Presumably, the number of Lodges was growing since the 1720s under the auspices of the English Grand Lodge and the whole agenda was well met by the educated and noble classes of France. Freemasonry in France was established in the 1720s and had experienced a lot of development in the 1730s shaping the thoughts and minds of many thinkers in that country. According to the historian of Freemasonry Daniel Ligou, the already mentioned Duke of Wharton was visiting France in the late 1720s and could participate in the process of establishment of the Freemasonry there, at least he was already an established figure in this organization back at home.150 On the other hand, Emmanual Rebold yet one more time mentioned Lord Derwentwater whose presence in France in 1725 was recorded and that he had the authority from the Grand Lodge of London to establish Lodges in the country, and in 1735 to exercise the power of a Provincial Grand Master.151 At the same time, something interesting should be noted.

The emergence of the word “Scottish” in Freemasonry is very peculiar and not everyone can clearly formulate what this term really means in this fraternity. Why did this word emerge in France and not in Scotland? In order to understand it, any scholar or an interested person should recall the name of a Scotsman Doctor and Baron Andrew Michael Ramsay, who was supposedly representing some political interests of Stuarts on the continent.152 According to E. Rebold, he was keen to establish Freemasonry that was not directly connected to the Grand Lodge of London, claiming that there is a Masonic system [rituals and charges] that were developed in Edinburgh, Scotland in the Lodge called Canongate Kilwinning, but that the real aim was to make it close to Stuarts and Catholics.153 Such claims are certainly very peculiar, and surely may have a lot behind them, it’s very possible that the Stuarts wanted to have some influence over the newly established, now international organization that was originally closely related to London and English nobility. There is a lot of doubt that there was some Catholic

147 J.G. Findel, p. 201. 148 Claude-Antoine Thory, Histoire de la Fondation du Grand Orient de Paris, p. 11. 149 Ibid., p. 13. 150 Daniel Ligou, Histoire des Francs-Maçons en France, (Privat, 2000) at pp. 40-41. 151 Emmanuel Rebold, A General History of Freemasonry: Based Upon the Ancient Documents Relating To, and the Monuments Erected by this Fraternity, from Its Foundation, in the Year 715 B.C., to the Present Time, (American Masonic Publishing Association, 1872) at p. 81. 152 Ibid., p. 81-82. 153 Ibid., p. 82. 54

interest behind it, but the Stuart Pretender was indeed Catholic, so no claim may be dropped, after all these political developments were taking place at that time and the world “Scottish” Freemasonry did emerge in France. If comparing the work of a historian to the one of a criminologist, then there is certainly a possible connection between Scotland and France that goes through Baron Andrew Ramsay. Additionally, the two countries were often closely related in politics, and could often create allegiances against England. At the same time, Catholics were not related to Freemasonry itself and it’s very doubtful that they were participating in the process of controlling or co-working with it, but what it really did was the support behind Stuarts. In the Encyclopedia of Freemasonry Robert G. Mackey connects Ramsay to the creation of the so-called Templar Freemasonry, which claims that it was established in Palestine by the Knights Templar.154 He was basically behind this idea that the Knights Templar and Freemasons are closely related, and there is an opinion that was also said by Oscar Patterson that most of the eighteenth-century writings on the fraternity and Templars may be traced to Ramsay.155 Thus, it may be supposed there is a possibility that the High Degrees in Freemasonry were developed originally by the followers of Ramsay. Hence, the later development of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite that incorporates these High Degrees. Also, Baronet Andrew Ramsay was baptized by the Church of Scotland [Presbyterian] and was known for his Christian universal principles and some level of romanticism without which he would probably not be able to create this general idea of relation between the Freemasonry and Templars. He is also believed to create such orders within the Freemasonry as the Knights Templar, the Degree of Red Cross, and the Sword of Babylon later on in his life converting to Catholicism in France.156 His conversion to Catholicism is the fact, but his true authorship of these orders may still be speculated over and over again.

So as it was noted before, the Duke of Wharton was claimed to be the first Provincial Grand Master in France, his followers Lord Harnwester and Duke of Autin well known for his great loyalty to Freemasons were connected to the Grand Lodge of London [Grand Lodge of England since 1738], though the latter was French and for acceptance of the position of Grand Master was putting himself in a lot of danger, - He had, in fact, braved the anger of the King, who had interdicted the lords of his court from attending the meetings of the Freemasons; and he, above all, had shown, in accepting the position of Grand Master, an unusual degree of courage, as he knew that the King had threatened him with arrest and condemned him to the Bastille for so doing.157 This interesting fact shows the overall picture of the Masonic status in the country where it was almost welcomed. Louis XV was first aware of the fact that England is not one hundred percent ally of France and the organization which was so closely related to it simply could not go under the radar. He was definitely afraid of the spying activity on the side of them, suspecting something what is now called the ‘political lobbyism’ and the old rivalry was repeating itself once again. Protestant England and the Netherlands were tolerating Freemasonry, and Louis XV was not so much afraid of Protestantism, which he would probably tolerate with the same style right from the beginning,

154 Albert G. Mackey, Encyclopedia of Freemasonry and its Kindred Sciences, (L.H. Everts, 1889) at p. 792. 155 Oscar Patterson III, Rough Mason, Mason, Freemason, Accepted Mason, (Rowman & Littlefield, 2017) at p. 110. 156 Edith Blake, The Realities of Freemasonry, (Chapman & Hall, 1879) at p. 40. 157 Ibid., p. 82. 55

but he could not tolerate the presence of so many English nobles in France and their possible influence. Another important factor on why Louis XV began to grow suspicious of the fraternity was based on the Papal Bull Eminenti Apostolatus [1738] proclaimed by Clement XII. It was standing against the Freemasonry claiming that it possesses the anti-Christian nature, anti-Catholic activity, and denies the authority of the Pope. Practically after the bull was issued, it became illegal for any Catholic to participate in the Lodges, however, even in Catholic France the situation was not that simple, and Freemasonry continued to exist. The Parliament of Paris was supposed to accept the Papal Bull so it could become the law, however, it did not happen, thus the prohibition of this fraternity did not go into effect in France.158 This important decision made by it allowed many people to join Freemasonry without being afraid to get persecuted by the authorities, and there is a possibility that even some clergymen were joining the fraternity or assisting it.159 Also, it speaks for the limited authority of the Catholic Church in France and the King, who whether he wished for it or not, could not influence the decision of the Parliament of Paris making France quite advanced for that time. It did not possess the same balance of powers that existed then in the United Kingdom, however, for sure it was very different from Spain or Russia. The influence of Protestantism or at least its presence upon the Freemasonry in France was not that obvious as in Britain, North America or Germany, but as it may be concluded so far, it did present itself among Huguenot emigres [including Holland], English, and Scottish representatives in France such as Duke of Wharton or Baronet Andrew Michael Ramsay.

There is one more person that should definitely be mentioned and he was standing the formation of the Grand Orient of France the way everyone knows it today back in the 1870s. His name is Frédéric Desmond. He was a Calvinist minister, theologian, and politician. The figure of this man is really standing out in the history of Freemasonry and theology because some may find his position somewhat contradictory, but unique. During the 1877 Convent of the Grand Orient of France [meaning Grand Lodge of France; Orient stands for the Lodge], he began to advocate for the laicity [Laïcité], so anyone can join the fraternity including atheists and agnostics.160 He is the link between Freemasonry, Calvinism, and laicity, something which English Freemasons or even such philosophers as Matthew Tindal or John Toland did not foresee as the possibility, at least publicly. Their universalism and attempts to tolerate different groups of Christians and Jews became known during their time, but atheism was the step forward, especially in public. Desmond had realized that Freemasonry should tolerate everyone and the concept of the Grand Architect of the Universe was not that important in the fraternity, and his position remained unchanged even after other world Lodges did not accept such a decision. Yet again Protestantism and Freemasonry met directly in the figure of F. Desmond, who was openly advocating laicity even while being a Calvinist minister and a Freemason at the same time, who was advocating atheism in Freemasonry not because he turned to be one, but merely for the freedom of conscience and tolerance. Additionally, he did not refuse Calvinism until the end of his life. The question may rise again, why or how did Protestantism

158 Roger Dachez, Histoire de la Franc-Maçonnerie Française. Que sais-je?, (PUF, 2003) at p. 53. 159 The Michigan Freemason, Freemason’s Monthly, Band 3, an article by J.C. Neilson Freemasonry in Scotland (Chaplin & Ihling Bros, Publishers and Proprietors, 1872) at p. 7. 160 Jean Massicot, La Franc-Maçonnerie, (Lulu, 2010) at p. 186. 56

and Freemasonry could get along in so many situations? It may be presumed that both systems were denying dogma or were prone to do so, and as it was argued before, Protestants are open to diversity and interpretations, something that requires freedom.161 Additionally, the 1877 Convent of the Grand Orient of France made the great schism in Freemasonry, the latter Grand Lodge was deemed irregular for its denial of the Ancient and Accepted Landmarks established in 1723 Anderson’s Constitution that requires the belief in the Supreme Being. Notably, the Grand Orient of France remains the most widespread in numbers in France, but not in other countries where regular Freemasonry is the majority. Practically, he was the true Huguenot, who was bridging another connection between those who were persecuted during the Wars of Religion in France, and total religious tolerance or the lack of religion at all. It was the step forward in Freemasonry by changing the rules so radically that until today the split was not stitched, even though a lot of time had passed. Desmond’s attempts to create the concept of laicity, so everyone may join the Lodge did not go well with the United Grand Lodge of England or the North American Grand Lodges, which are dominated by other Protestants who are not ready to make this kind of step. Nevertheless, it shows one more edge of Calvinism, at least in the eyes and mind of one of its followers and it must be very evident that this denomination is certainly capable of getting along with Freemasonry and vice versa. Also, as it was written before, many British Freemasons were members of the Calvinist [Presbyterian] denomination and did not experience dissonance. Certain clashes happened later on and many Protestants and atheists began to experience incompatibilities while sharing membership in the same Lodges. At the beginning of the twentieth century [1913] the Grand Orient of France decided not to allow the Lodge Les Centre des Amis to use the symbol of the Grand Architect, which led to the creation of the separate Grand Lodge named Grande Loge Nationale Indépendante et Régulière pour la France et les Colonies.162

The Netherlands

This country is known for its history of Protestantism and Reformation, the resistance against Spanish rule, and Freemasonry. In the previous chapter, it was discussed that many Huguenots who turned to be Freemasons were staying in Hague and other towns in the Netherlands to experience more religious freedom [at least for their own denomination], and had a lot of contacts with English representatives of Freemasonry. The latter group was obviously from the Protestant country and itself belonged to the Protestant denomination [mostly Calvinist, but also others such as Anabaptists, etc]. It may be interesting for the reader to ask if the Netherlands were part of the overall European tendency to implement guilds and sure the land did it as much as the whole Holy Roman Empire, Low Countries, Britain, and many others. When getting closer to the concept of Reformation, it appears that the equal concept of pluralism always becomes more important because many voices in theology and

161 Jean-Pierre Bastian, Protestantisme et Franc-Maçonnerie: de la tolérance religieuse à la religion de la tolérance? : [actes du colloque Protestantisme et Franc-Maçonnerie, organisé par le Grand Orient de France à Nantes, les 25 et 26 avril 1998, (Editions Maçonniques de France, 2000) at p. 208. 162 Edited by Henrik Bogdan, Jan A.M. Snoek, Handbook of Freemasonry, an article by Guy Liagre, Protestantism and Freemasonry, (BRILL, 2014) at p.169. 57

therefore in politics must be heard.163 Politically speaking the Netherlands were caught in the middle of all the developments that took place in Europe during the Reformation and slide towards it very quickly getting closer to Germany and England. Such a thing was overly dictated by the Dutch struggle against Spain and as it was argued in the previous chapters, the idea of patriotism or self-identity can often get connected with the denominational or religious affiliations. Mostly it was the country that had developed its freedoms during that time, when it was heading in the direction of its political independence and sliding under the flag of Reformation. The Dutch were as much as their neighbors falling into religious camps that at the same time were drawing political agenda with it, Catholic resistance to reforms became quite powerful, the setting authority of the Reformed Church was not in favor of the dissenting denominations such as Anabaptists. This particular development was similar to the one taking place in England with the Catholics and Anglicans on two sides and Dissenters being in the middle struggling to get toleration [something that did not really happen until the 1687 Act of Indulgence]. Yet, it struggled for more unity, hence it was necessary for the normal functioning of the state. Judith Pollmann argued it as follows:

The prospect of schism pulled Europe in two different directions. On the one hand, schism continued to be seen as deeply undesirable, and indeed as irreligious, and most rulers and political theorists found it hard to imagine how a society could function without one common religious code.164

Conceptually, it may be right to say that as much as in England, the United Provinces need stability in order to function as the state should, and it must be always kept in mind that any governmental structure wishes for any sort of division. At some point, nobles and people of the status [economy, clergy] began to turn toward the Reformed Church concept, but the struggle was calling for more compromises, especially if looking at the similar processes taking place elsewhere in Europe. The Netherlands and its people began to develop certain anticipation for the religious war, and different social groups began to enter their favored denominations while not really looking for a conflict. For example, wealthy burghers have longed for the Reformed Church [1550s] and slightly earlier the Anabaptists began to show some degree of a threat to the government in the 1530s.165 Clearly, the Reformed was more favored by the government because it was composed or was influenced by the wealth. Dissenters were not welcomed most likely due to their independent standing or self-governing because of their smaller groups that in return were harder to be governed by the outside authority. Once again, a very similar process took place in England with the Congregationalists. Eventually, after a number of violent conflicts such as the Beggar army acts against Catholics [1573] or the Pacification of Ghent in 1576, the idea of unity began to step in in the form of a religievrede. As Pollmann put it, - religious coexistence - was imposed on nominally Catholic towns in

163 Edited by Gareth Davies, Matej Avbelj, Research Handbook on Legal Pluralism and EU Law, an article by Poul F. Kjaer, Claim-making and parallel universes: legal pluralism from Church and empire to statehood and the European Union, (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2018) at p. 5. 164 Judith Pollmann, Religious Choice in the Dutch Republic: The Reformation of Arnoldus Buchelius, 1565- 1641, (Manchester University Press, 1999) at p. 5. 165 Ibid., p. 6. 58

which Reformed demands for right of worship could no longer be ignored.166 After the signing of the Union of Utrecht in 1579 and the fall of Catholic Groningen [1580], the concept of religievrede was not very important anymore because almost all of the United Provinces including the Northern ones have technically become Reformed. Nevertheless, it did not mean that there was total control over the population and particularly over what they thought was another side of oppression. For instance, Calvinists, too were capable of the inquisitorial acts, often against the poor or women, the developments that took place in Geneva were not very close to religious tolerance.167 Thus, the Dutch did not really look upon this path, possibly due to the denominational diversity - one group could not totally manage the religious monopoly. This achievement was very Dutch so to speak and gave rise to religious tolerance, and it was the Reformation that made the development take place there during that period due to the above- mentioned pluralism. It was similar to England and maybe no wonder why Freemasonry, Huguenots [Calvinists], and English nobles all began to sort of build bridges in the Hague and other towns in the Netherlands. If the majority of the Dutch were Reformed then the majority of the Dutch Freemasons had to belong to this denomination.

As in France, the Freemasonry was brought up to the Netherlands from England [or Britain if meaning the Scottish representatives]. It was argued before that the Duke of Wharton and Dr. John Desagulier were visiting Hague in the 1720s and assisted in the process of the installation of Masonic Lodges in the country. French Calvinist felt more at home when meeting with English in the Netherlands, and even the future Holy Roman Emperor Francis I was initiated into Freemasonry in Hague. Historian of Freemasonry George Smith noted that the Masonic Lodges in the Netherlands were in existence since 1725 and were growing in numbers well until 1735 when the first time in Europe the government began to pay attention to the developing fraternity and had decided to investigate it.168 Eventually in 1735 the States- general, after some investigation, took radical steps and prohibited Masons from meeting in the Lodges. Although this move was not followed by the prosecutions or violence, the lodges sent their representatives to the respectable government to prove that they have no negative intentions or wishes to build plots against it. At the same time, the meetings were taking place regardless of the meek prohibition. The town secretary [magistrate of Amsterdam] paid the investigatory visit to one of the Lodges to personally see and learn what they do in it. As the result of it he was more than willing to join the fraternity himself, and soon after listening and learning from him most of the members of the magistrate became Freemasons themselves.169 This shows a great level of tolerance and even Calvinist principles that dominated the social sphere in the Netherlands and demanded a lot of exposure of every day lives among its followers, had eventually nothing against the Freemasonic meetings. Most likely it was some continuation of the religievrede and merely the result of diversity that could exist in the country.

166 Ibid., p. 7. 167 Brian A. Pavlac, Witch Hunts in the Western World: Persecution and Punishment from the Inquisition through the Salem Trials, (ABC-CLIO, 2009) at p. 73. 168 Captain George Smith, The Use and Abuse of Free-masonry: A Work of the Greatest Utility to the Brethren of the Society, to Mankind in General, and to the Ladies in Particular, (Masonic Publishing and Manufacturing Company, 1866) at p. 92. 169 Ibid., p. 93. 59

Freemasonry in the Netherlands was in many ways similar to the one in Britain, however, from time to time there were issues with the clergy, and it was not necessarily Catholic. Calvinist Reformed Church in that country was also very suspicious of the fraternity, and therefore, its standing was not merely the same as in London or Edinburgh, despite the fact that a lot of influential people could be members of it. In 1738 William IV of Orange had joined one of the Lodges in Hague, the year when Pope had issued his anti-Masonic bull, which did not have a lot of influence on other denominations, and especially Calvinist dominated Netherlands, however, in 1740 the situation was getting slightly more anti-Masonic in the Calvinist country, too. George Smith mentioned and described one story in his book The Use and Abuse of Free-Masons, and it clearly recalled one case of religious discrimination on the side of the Protestant ministry.

Two young officers of very good families, who were masons, applied to the minister of the parish, in which they resided, to examine them in certain points of religion, agreeable to the custom of the country, and according to the Heidelburgh [Heidelberg., O.K.] catechism, and then to grant them a certificate to entitle them to receive the holy sacrament. After the examination was over, and the priest satisfied in regard to their capacity, he asked them, if they were Free-masons? Being answered in the affirmative, he refused to grant them their certificates, which in that country is the expulsion from the communion… At last, the grand assembly of the States general took it into their consideration, and ordered, that for the future no clergyman should ask either that or any other question concerting masonry, in the execution of his ecclesiastical duty;170

This very peculiar quote had to be shown in full because it really portrays the situation and status of this organization among the eyes of some clergy and the States-general. On one side it was not a secular, but tolerant society in the 1730s where the government was insisting on the separation of religious beliefs and fraternal organizations or social activities, so to speak. On the other, Protestant clergy in the Netherlands were not purely accepting this concept and thought that everyday life, of any kind, should be observed by the religious belief, and no organization or social gathering can abstain from this principle. Calvinist theology was different from the Catholic one, and there was no relationship with the Vatican, however, the Papal Bull that was issued in 1738 could create the notion of suspicion among not only Catholics but any other denomination. Particularly, it could be the fact on the Continent, where Catholics were living in a very close proximity to Protestants and in the United Provinces it was certainly real that many Calvinist ministers, saw this anti-Masonic notion as not just an opinion said by the Pope for other Catholics, but to all Christians. This position was not very influential though, and was deemed to fail because the concept of pluralism, early European attempts to create biconfessionalism [at least of ideas and in private life], and religievrede turned to be strong enough in the Netherlands at that time.171

170 Ibid., p. 93-94. 171 Edited by Thomas Max Safley, A Companion to Multiconfessionalism in the Early Modern World, an article by Benjamin J. Caplan, In Equality Enjoying the Same Favor”: Biconfessionalism in the Low Countries, (BRILL, 2011) at p. 104. 60

III

Germany

This country is very important to discuss when writing about Protestants and Freemasons, especially when it comes to their relations. As it was mentioned and described in the previous chapters on the historical setting of the given topic, Germany was the home country to the Reformation and the whole movement of these changes. It was the place that was strongly ripped apart by the religious wars between Catholics and Protestants turning the land into a place of many sorrows caused by the denominational split. Also, as it was written previously, at this point the Reformation was showing its slight, and of course, arguably, negative side when it divided Europe into two hostile political and confessional camps. This idea is certainly advocated by the Catholic side and can be clearly opposed by many Protestants, but the setting of history is showing now that Europe, and especially Germany was indeed divided as never before. At the same time, it should be recalled that humanistic attempts to unite all the people of good will persisted among thinkers such as Erasmus, and later Freemasonry began to attempt exactly that, it trying to erase religious differences among its brethren and replace them with the common symbolism. Protestantism and speculative Masonry have co-existed on German lands for a long time, almost as soon as the latter set foot on the Continent. Operative Masonry had presented itself there since the Middle ages in the form of guilds and organizations of stone-cutters, Stein-Metzen.172 The whole tradition of apprentices, companions or fellow-crafts and of course Masters was in place as much as everywhere else in Europe. At this point, it must be said that if speaking about guilds and operative Masons or the fraternities of builders, Germany as much as any other European country can claim the roots of Freemasonry, however, the speculative Masons, or the society of Freemasons came into existence merely in England. Referring to the Scottish Freemason William Preston, historian of Freemasonry Robert Macoy claimed that the first eleven Freemasons have asked for permission in 1733 to open the Lodge in Hamburg under the authority of the Grand Lodge of England [most likely the G.L. of London before 1738].173 These were two decades during which Freemasonry began to enter France, the Netherlands, and Germany directly under the conditions of regularity authorized by the English Freemasons. However, this historical data goes to support the foundation of the speculative Masonry and it was clearly of English descent. Stone-masons or operatives have influenced Britain before, bringing more innovations into the Gothic style there very early on, and it may be visible in the King’s College chapel, which was created by the master from Germany.174 Interesting traditions were uniting the Stein-Metzen of old and their English colleagues. There is a record of the old English song, which recalls a story of honor of the German stone-cutters found in the Halliwells manuscript [only first six lines].

172 Robert Macoy, General History, Cyclopedia and Dictionary of Freemasonry: Containing an Elaborate Account of the Rise and Progress of Freemasonry and Its Kindred Associations--ancient and Modern: Also, Definitions of the Technical Terms Used by the Fraternity, (Masonic Publishing Company, 1870) at p. 42. 173 Ibid., p. 42. 174 George Franklin Fort, The Early History and Antiquities of Freemasonry: As Connected with Ancient Norse Guilds, and the Oriental and Mediæval Building Fraternities, (Bradley, 1881) at p. 123. 61

Pray we now to God Almyght,

And to his swete modr Mary bryght,

Yat me mowe kepe yese articulus here,

And yese pyntes well al yfere,

As dede yese holy martyres fowre

Yat in yys craft were of gret honoure...175

The story continued on about how honorable the stone-cutters were and how they have refused to cut out an image of their Emperor, so for the refusal to do so, all of them were eventually executed.

The speculative Freemasonry was of British creation and caught the eye of many educated and progressive men in Germany as much as in France or the Netherlands. As it was based on Anderson's Constitution(s) religion was not important, thus taking out divisions and limiting the belief in God only in the form of the universalist Supreme Being. It must be underlined that these first eleven Freemasons, who have petitioned to attain the Constitution from England were from Hamburg, and it’s known that this part of Germany was Lutheran since the 1500s, and was surrounded by the other Protestant states to the North. Later on, it will be very visible that German Freemasonry became specifically prominent under Frederick the Great of Prussia, who was very much interested in Voltaire, Enlightenment, and Freemasonry. He was well known for his policies on religious tolerance and gathered many Huguenot refugees in Prussia by giving them status and rights. However, the establishment of Freemasonry in Germany had started before his famous reign, and almost during the same time after the imperial Diet [territories that still were under some degree of control by the Holy Roman Empire] had forbidden recognition and authority to the operative Masons [stone-cutters and builders’ associations] in 1707 and once again in 1731.176 It should not be mixed with the emergence and future prolongation of the speculative Masons, better known as Freemasons. The latter fraternity was just beginning to emerge in the German-speaking lands and had promised to become quite important in that country.

Freemasonry, therefore, in its new attire, rapidly extended to the Continent, and especially in France and Germany, where numerous lodges were opened. It can scarcely be presumed that the ritual work thus introduced into Germany was accepted without modification, or that many symbolic appliances, preserving a vigorous vitality in the Masonic craft guilds, were not merged into, and made an integral portion of, the forms and initiatory ceremonies.177

This note is important to bold out the distinction between operative and speculative directions in Masonry [speculative is always referred to Freemasonry; Franc Maçonnerie;

175 Georg Kloss, Die Freimaurerei in ihrer wahren Bedeutung aus den alten und ächten Urkunden der Steinmetzen, Masonen und Freimaurer nachgewiesen, (O. Klemm, Leipzig, 1846) at p. 257. 176 Ibid., p. 256. 177 George Franklin Fort, The Early History and Antiquities of Freemasonry, p 154. 62

Freimaurerei]. It was argued in the previous chapters that many writers often do not distinguish the craft of stone-cutters and their traditions and those of Freemasons, which took so much from the first, including symbolism, possibly certain rights of passage, and the guild-like structure. In other words, it all did not begin with the Egyptian pyramids, but the symbolism of them was used later on as an example of the early geometric structure which all play an important role in Freemasonry. The principle of the rough stone in Freemasonry is of course cannot be directly paralleled to the stone-cutters, it means that an uneducated, bad-mannered person or the whole society can progress and make personal or social changes. The concept is purely symbolic and allegorical. The stone was strongly symbolized and paralleled with the human being. So, Germany was merging with the new speculative Masonic tradition starting with the 1730s and became popular among the educated classes and nobles. In 1737 the Hamburg Lodge was fully recognized by the Grand Lodge of London [presumably changed to England after 1738] and in 1741 acquired the title Absalom, and notably in 1738 sent the representative officer's deputation to Braunschweig to initiate the Crown Prince Frederick, the future King of Prussia.178 Surely, this initiation was extremely important to send the deputation for and make the future of Freemasonry in Prussia. It was only parallel to the initiation of Francis, the Duke of Lorraine in Hague the decade earlier. Lutheran Prince and later toleration of Freemasonry on the official level in the Protestant Prussia was most likely not merely pre- supposed by the retaining powers of the Prussian King. However, by the nature of the tolerant spirit in the country when it came to dissenters that could be prosecuted in the areas with Catholic authority over the spiritual life of its faithful. After all, around this particular time, there was the beginning of the fraternity’s illegal status under the recently issued Papal Bull, and on the contrary, such countries as Prussia could give asylum to those who were not fitting in. The best example is the French Huguenots that often became prominent people in Prussia. The L’estocq family was belonging to these Huguenot emigres who have achieved a lot in the Kingdom of Prussia under its Protestant crown.179 Another factor of such tolerance and favor was indeed the Prince’s and later King’s love of France and French Enlightenment. Frederick was specifically friendly with Voltaire, believed in arts, philosophy, and beautiful music.180 He was protecting all the things that could be associated with humanism and it all strongly contrasted with his father’s values, who was famous for his military values, antagonism of classicism in education including Latin, music, and idealistic philosophy. Famous sufferings of young Friedrich under his methods of bringing him up could not be forgotten by the future King. Notably, in 1738 Friedrich was initiated into the Freemasonry in Braunschweig, further away from Berlin where his father, even though he was getting old, could make an alarm and grow suspicious of the new organization. Friedrich II had become the King in 1740 and was conducting one of the Lodges not less, but in Charlottenburg royal residence, right near the place where he had later built his own new residence palace known as Sans-Souci. More Lodges were growing in the 1730s and 40s, especially while looking at two examples, one was Friedrich II and another Francis I of Austria, who was the great protector of Freemasonry in

178 Robert Macoy, General History, Cyclopedia and Dictionary of Freemasonry, p. 42. 179 The Nation: A Weekly Journal Devoted to Politics, Literature, Science, Drama, Music, Art, Industry, Volume 15, (Nation Associates, 1872) p. 89. 180 Thomas Carlyle, History of Friedrich II of Prussia, Called Frederick the Great, (Tauchnitz, 1862) at pp. 14- 16. 63

his Catholic country after 1738 and made Austrian Empress Maria Theresia stay friendly towards his Brethren. He was probably the most visible example of a Freemason in the Catholic country, who managed to at least make it legal without any serious exposure. In contrast, the Kingdom of Prussia became more tolerant of this organization without any serious attempts to close it or somehow change its position because there was no open or allowed hostility. The Lodges kept opening between 1738 and 1750s on a fast paste certainly getting a lot of support from Friedrich himself because one of the Lodges was named after him in 1744 [Friedrich] in the city of Hanover. Eventually, in 1766 the Grand Lodge of England had established the Grand Provincial Lodge in Frankfurt am Main, and a few years earlier the system of so-called “Strict Observance” was installed in Naumburg (Saale) in one of the lodges [1757].181 Notably, all these developments took place in mostly Protestant areas of Germany and under the protection of the King of Prussia. Hamburg continued to play an important role in the life of Freemasons of Germany and its Lodges were getting a lot of respect from England. Here is the big example of how the Protestant position was very comfortable for the existence of Freemasonry, even though these two thoughts and concepts are different, the latter is not a religion or at least always said so, and it’s not being an integral part of the Christian religion, however, it shared more similarities than differences, and in particularly Protestant Germany it became quite obvious. This work is not going to discuss the later development of the Illuminati organization in Bavaria by Adam Weishaupt, who was also a Freemason as much as most of his friends that found it in the 1770s. The only thing which must be said is that the Illuminati is not a Freemason organization and did not have any sort of mutual recognition with them. Simultaneous membership in both of them by some Freemasons, the use of certain symbols that are common in Freemasonry gave the beginning to numerous rumors and chatters about it being the same group that seeks some strange and sinister aim. Due to more radical than neutral political position, Weishaupt’s club brings some shadowy reputation to his short-living group, but also upon the Freemasonry, too.

Scandinavia

A few words should also be said about the lands lying to the North from Germany, which also belong to the Protestant tradition and its countries were known for the so-called Swedish System in Freemasonry. Often this system is associated with the strict order of things in the Lodges, great sobriety during the ritual dinner [Agape], and even stricter moral attitudes. Protestantism in its Lutheran form was introduced from Germany to Scandinavian countries in the 1520s and by the 1540s the process was more or less finished in the favor of the Reformation. It did not cause a lot of bloody conflicts that surrounded the whole process in many other European lands, but in one way or another was taken by the population without much hesitation and of course, supported by the ruling elites. Two centuries later Freemasonry was not prosecuted in any of the Scandinavian countries, and also had a profound influence from Germany and not necessarily directly from England.

181 Robert Macoy, General History, Cyclopedia and Dictionary of Freemasonry, pp. 42-43. 64

The original Lodge in Denmark was installed by the authority of the Grand Lodge of Berlin in 1743, later in 1745, it was recognized by the Grand Lodge of England giving it more recognition in the eyes of the ruling elites in Denmark.182 A few decades later the Danish Freemasonry was including Charles-Carl of Hesse [his mother was Princess Louise of Denmark] and King Christian VIII as its Grand Masters, something that could be paralleled to Prussia led by Friedrich II or Austria under Francis I. Such examples give the highest tolerance level to Freemasonry and there is no question that all these monarchs, except for Francis of Austria were Lutheran. However, as it’s often said, an exclusion only proves the periodic system. The whole tendency to get higher protection from the authorities remained in Denmark and for instance as of the 1890s it continued to be and was internationally recognized by other Grand Lodges.

Under the jurisdiction of this Grand Body there exists one Provincial Grand Lodge (at Odense, Provincial Grand Master, BRO. COUNT C. F. Rantzau, Royal Chamberlain), two St. Andrew’s Chapters, and seventeen Subordinate St. John’s Lodges. The total number of the brethren in the jurisdiction is about 3,700. The Protector of Freemasonry in Denmark is His Majesty KING CHRISTIAN IX.183

Danish and Norwegian Reformation and later the discussed topic of its parallels with Freemasonry should be discussed in pairs because Norway was under the authority of the Kingdom of Denmark during the 1500s. The process of establishing the Reformation and Church of Denmark in Norway was seriously pushed by King Christian III who proclaimed Lutheran doctrine to become official in 1537 exiling the Bishop Olav Engelbrektsson and presumably being politically involved in the execution of Jon Arason [the Bishop of Hólar in Iceland] and his sons.184 These were famous excesses of the Scandinavian Reformation but did not lead to more violent wars similar to the Thirty Years War. The establishment of Freemasons in Norway was directly attached to this process in Denmark and was rather peaceful than worrisome. It was protected by the Danish royals and nobility. Due to the fact that Norway was ruled by Denmark in the 1740s, the first Lodge on Norwegian soil was established under the authority of the lodge St. Martin located in Copenhagen, Denmark in 1749. It never experienced any serious prosecutions or prohibitions until the Nazi occupation of Norway during World War II.

Sweden was developing its own Freemason tradition which may be somewhat similar to such processes in other Protestant European countries, specifically being close to Denmark. Hence, it went through nearly the same history of the Reformation [in Sweden the Reformation also included Finland as the latter was integrated into the Swedish kingdom], which was not noted by the violent civil wars, it developed the gradual, but sometimes tough change of denomination that was taking place along the Lutheran lines. However, this change did not take place as quickly as in Denmark due to less popular support and smaller urban population that

182 Ibid., p. 36. 183 Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the State of New York; One Hundred And Fourteenth Annual Communication, (New York Press, J.J. Little & Co, 1895) at p. 148. 184 Alexander Baumgartner, Nordische Fahrten: Skizzen und Studien, (Herder, 1889) at p. 284

was not that well connected to such centers in central and northern Germany where Lutheran concepts were the strongest. In Denmark, it was one of the leading factors of the faster change from the original Catholic Church to the Church of Denmark.185 Sweden as much as Germany had experienced the revival or better to say, the establishment of the Swedish literary language through the translation of the Bible into Swedish in 1541; it also touched Finnish culture because the same compilation of both, the Old and New Testaments became also available in Finnish language.186 It did experience the influx of Huguenot refugees during the 1500s, however, they were not making a lot of influence upon the developing Church of Sweden later on, though were seriously tolerated by it and by the Swedish monarchy. The same level of tolerance would be procured upon the later growing Freemasonry in Sweden, but not right away. Beginning with the 1730s when it was brought there directly from England [1736] by establishing the first provincial Lodge [ruled from abroad], King Frederik I had prohibited it under the penalty of death, but past seven years this ban was removed and the monarch himself became the head of the Swedish Freemasonry. It was argued by the researcher of Freemasonry R.L. Tafel refers to the Ersch and Gruber’s Allgemeine Enzyklopädie, which mentions these details about the Freemason history.187 It somewhat parallels the situation in the Netherlands where the first accounts of the investigation upon the society of Freemasons by the magistrate of Amsterdam was mentioned in the preceding chapter. In both cases, the authority first decided to investigate or prohibit the organization, though later not merely protected it, but joined it without any further suspicion. On one hand, there were many nobles who wanted to be closer to their equals in other countries, on the other it was something very new. It could be another way out from regular things they were used to, so Freemasonry itself was something that could be an alternative philosophical concept [more than one], new religion, or just the place where they could socialize and talk. In the War and Peace, Leo Tolstoy had distinguished Freemasons into four groups, one seeks mysticism, the second searches for democracy and justice, the third looks for social lifts, and the fourth simply wants to socialize.188 Presumably, it was always true about the fraternity and often caused various splits in it because all four types sometimes cannot stay together regardless of any factor. In Scandinavia Freemasonry was staying in peace with the ruling classes and generally proves the fact that Protestantism and Freemasonry can have good relations and be connected, even though both are very different in the core concepts.

185 Edited by Ole Peter Grell, The Scandinavian Reformation: From Evangelical Movement to the Institutionalisation of Reform, (Cambridge University Press, 1995) at p. 5. 186 Edited by Mandred J. Holler, Timo Airaksinen, Hannu Nurmi, Finnish-German Yearbook of Political Economy, Volume 2, (Verlag Holler, München, 2019) at p. 139. 187 R.L. Tafel, Documents Concerning the Life and Character of Emanuel Swedenborg p. 737. 188 See Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace, (New American Library, 1968). Check out each chapter that mentions Freemasonry and Pierre Bezukhov’s involvement in it. 66

North America

Britain and the New World

All traditions and religious practices that can be linked to Freemasonry and Protestantism were brought to the North American continent directly from Europe and particularly Britain. It truly matters when mentioning the fact that often both concepts are visualized as an open influence on the future establishment of the United States. Of course, many of these aspects cannot be exaggerated, however, they both, indeed, did play an influential role in the process of creating the republican principles, which may also be traced to France, Voltaire, and Marquis de Lafayette who were by the way also Freemasons.189 Later on, this connection between Benjamin Franklin and them two, would make history and enhance the relations between revolutionary colonies and France. The US and Canada have continued the tradition of cooperation between Freemasonry and Protestantism, but not everything was always smooth, and as it was noted in the introductory chapter, the relations became difficult during the 1820s and 30s with the emergence of the Anti-Masonic Party. The only American political organization, which was marking its ideological goal on the title. Publicly and in the open. Nevertheless, both concepts have proved to be more mutually tolerant than different and pure, or better to say agonizing conflicts did not take place. In Britain, it was already rooted as an organization that was not fighting the Anglican Church or other Protestant denominations, in the colonies many respectable people became Freemasons and shared Protestant views, so there was no need for a continuous conflict. For example, Franklin was truly believing that neither atheist or religious fanaticism were good for the social order and good for humanity. He was the man of Enlightenment and most likely had a pro-Deistic tendency, but he never spoke against the Protestant values of the day, he believed that religion must be pious and shape the human being for his own benefit, thus changing from the scientific Deism to a moral one or humanistic.190 The worst accusation of the day could lay in the field of atheism or the direct negation of all Churches, religious organizations, and governments of all kinds, this did not happen with the Canadian or American Freemasons, who were all brought up in the Protestant tradition. The same can be said about the Founding Fathers of the United States. There was no direct conflict between the Anglican and later the Episcopal Churches and Freemasonry, so this notion of co-existence and pluralism carried on from Britain and partially the Netherlands where Freemasonry also found many members among its Calvinist majority in magistrates and the States-general fulfilling the concept of religievrede. These notions were transferred to North America with its carriers from Western Europe.

189 J.W.S. Mitchell, The History of Freemasonry and Masonic Digest [...] to which are Added the Old Charges and Ancient Regulations as Collated by Order of the Grand Lodge of England, in 1722, Volume 2, (Marietta Geo.: Published by the author, 1859) at. 106. 190 James Campbell, Recovering Benjamin Franklin: An Exploration of a Life of Science and Service, (Open Court Publishing, 1999) at p. 126. 67

Colonial and the Revolutionary Periods

First Lodges began to establish themselves in North American almost immediately after Freemasonry became more popular on the European Continent. In other words, the first Lodges in the British colonies began to get installed soon after those in the Netherlands, France, and Germany. Philadelphia turned to be the first city that saw the establishment of the original Masonic Lodge in the British colonies in 1731 [at least there are no earlier accounts, but single standing Freemasons could stay there before the given year].191 It must also be noted that the installation of the Lodge is preceded by the preparatory period, so it was probably already gathering, possibly without minutes, a year or two before the actual opening ceremony.

It would appear from this that there were one or more Lodges in Philadelphia in 1730. Chief Justice William Allen was elected and installed the Grand Master of Pennsylvania on June 24, 1732. Upon his election he appointed William Pringle Deputy Master, and Thomas Boude and Benjamin Franklin were chosen Wardens. This Assembly met at the Tun Tavern, in Water Street.192

The above quote underlines the fact that the most respectable people in colonial Philadelphia were already participating in the Lodge meetings right during its establishment. After all, somebody as William Allen, who was the Chief Justice in colonial Pennsylvania also belonged to the Presbyterian denomination and his Calvinist colleagues were his friends, possibly brothers in the Lodge, and such people as the Church minister Reverend Samuel Chandler was in good relations with him well until the Revolutionary period.193 At that time [and of course later years] strict Presbyterian moral code in the colonies could not really get contradicted by any other party or the system of beliefs, if someone was not corresponding with the notion, then that person would be completely disavowed from the community. Freemason meetings were certainly known to local ministers and pastors in Britain and its colonies, thus truly making it an impossibility to hide for a long time. Then this issue did not cause much uproar as it will later on during the Anti-Masonic Party era. Freemasonry was becoming closely related to the social life in colonies creating a sense of unity between different Protestant denominations and bridging the gaps between different colonies. It was not really seen as a contradiction to the teachings of the Bible by most of the ministers and pastors. The Bible was and is still necessary to be presented on the Altar in every Lodge, in accordance with the Masonic Constitution(s), and of course, this tradition was known to the contemporary religious leaders mostly making them more at peace with the fraternity. The Fredericksburg Lodge, in Virginia in which George Washington was initiated and raised to the third Masonic degree, did

191 Compiled by Henry Whittemore, Freemasonry in North America from the Colonial Period to the Beginning of the Present Century: Also the History of Masonry in New York from 1730 to 1888 in Connection with the History of the Several Lodges Included in what is Now Known as the Third Masonic District of Brooklyn, (Artotype Printing and Publishing Co., New York, 1889) at p. 2. 192 Ibid., p. 3. 193 Norman Sonny Cohen, William Allen: Chief Justice of Pennsylvania, 1704-1780, (University of California, 1966) at p. 225. 68

swear an oath on the Bible published in 1688.194 It did not create any contradiction in his mind or the minds of his obviously Protestant brethren in the Lodge itself. Actually, the whole concept of self-governing among many Protestant denominations [Congregationalists, Baptists, to a large degree Presbyterians, etc] discussed in one of the previous chapters had a profound influence on the personal responsibility of each separate man. An individual could belong to a fraternity as long as that fraternity did not openly contradict Biblical teachings or basically its interpretation in accordance with one of the above-mentioned denominations. One congregation could be totally separated from the other in the right to rule itself, so if that particular congregation or the church community was not seeing Freemasonry as something dangerous, then it could be free from criticism or suspicion from the other neighboring congregation. The same was always noted among Freemasons, too because each Lodge was independent from the other and had to correspond merely to the District or Grand Lodge, and even in those cases it always possessed a lot of freedom, for example, to accept or not to accept the new candidate. The colonial community did not mostly see this organization as something anti-Christian in nature, hence everyone knew each other, they did not see it as the cult that could rival them in spirit, and what is most important it did not include the people from other religions, something that would be of greater suspicion in those days. Everyone in those relatively small communities knew each other and went to the same churches since their childhood, the minister could sit on the church bench with his later brother in the Lodge, and religion did not play a role for as long as it was the same. The effect of unity or inter- denominational factor did play a role when longer distances within the colonies had to separate different Lodges geographically, and for instance, Presbyterian brothers had to visit their brothers from the Quaker community, so they were united by the fraternity through its internal unity [something that would later play an important role during the War of Independence].195 However, those brothers from a different area were not participating in the local church life, they were not supposed to fit in because they were visitors only, and their Freemasonry or denomination was not necessarily asked upon. In other words, each individual community was living its own life, and for as long as so many people knew each other, knew their regular lives, then such things as Freemasonry where the Bible is not contradicted, but lays on the symbolic Altar and most of the brethren visit the local church regularly did not raise many questions.

As it was noted previously, the first Masonic Lodges were installed [using the Freemason terminology] beginning with the early 1730s and have included a lot of important people in the colonies. As noted by Henry Stillson and William J. Hughan the British authorities that belonged to the noble class were involved in the process. It was paralleled to the installations of new Lodges in Continental Europe around the same time, and often by the same people. How could it be contradicted by the local British or colonial public and religious leaders if such figures as the Duke of Norfolk or the Lord Viscount Montague were in contact with the colonial authorities over the process of introducing new Lodges? Here is the short

194 Edited by J.W. Chaplin, The Michigan Freemason. A Monthly Magazine, (Ihling Bros, 1873) at p. 442. 195 J.G. Findel, History of Freemasonry From Its Origin Down to the Present Day, Translated from the Second German Edition, (London, Asher & Co., 1869) at p. 533. 69

quote mentioned by Stillson and Hughan that really shows the comparison of the process of bringing Freemasonry to the colonies and to Continental Europe.

On the fifth day of June, 1730, the first authority for the assembling of Freemasons in America was issued by the Duke of Norfolk, Grand Master of Free and Accepted Masons of England, to Daniel Coxe, of New Jersey, appointing him Provincial Grand Master of New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. On April 30, 1733, Lord Viscount Montague issued a deputation to Henry Price, of Boston, appointing him Provincial Grand Master of the Craft in New England.196

It appears to be almost of the state foreign affair that could be compared to the establishment of the foreign embassy that included deputations, representatives, and the ambassador himself. The whole officiality of how the Freemason fraternity was founded in the British North American colonies only adds to the importance and respect given to it by the governmental officials, who themselves were belonging to this organization. It may be interesting to understand that so many nobles really did not see any contradiction to their faith, otherwise, none of it would happen during the age when religion was still very much of use and application. Protestant toleration of the fraternity and in return, the Freemason toleration and acceptance of the Protestant communities, its mutual co-existence could not be damaged by sudden publications or rumors about it. Suspicion was always there, but it was not ending in Edicts or Laws to prohibit the organization. Something what was happening in the Russian Empire where this organization was under the wide control of the authorities during Catherine II, Paul I and was eventually prohibited in 1722 by Alexander I. 1738 Papal Bull made the whole organization illegal in the Catholic world and it became the grave sin for any Catholic to participate in any kind of the Masonic activity. The situation was completely and obviously different in the Protestant world where suspicion existed, but it did not lead to full-scale arrests or riots.

The revolutionary era that established the United States was important for making the organization of Freemasons more patriotic for the cause of American independence, however, it should not be forgotten that they were represented on both sides of the conflict. Often such situations make Freemasons stand against each other in the so-called profane life, the term used for the world outside the Lodge, and it is seen as the worst happening that can follow a brother. The Oath taken during the initiation calls for mutual help and keeping of the Masonic secrets, something that becomes seriously shattered by war of any kind. This was exactly the case during the American War of Independence when many American generals and servicemen were Freemasons.197 For example, what did George Washington feel when he was supposed to go against his brothers from the Lodge in which they were participating in the Ritual labors for years, and at some point became enemies? He was participating in the works of different Lodges during the war and always remained very close to the organization [some sources even claim that he had initiated Marquis de Lafayette, but most likely he was initiated before].198

196 Henry Leonard Stillson, William James Hughan, History of the Ancient and Honorable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons, and Concordant Orders, (Fraternity Publishing Company, 1890) at p. 219. 197 Edited by J.W. Chaplin, The Michigan Freemason. A Monthly Magazine, p. 504. 198 Edited by Foster Pratt, The Michigan Freemason. A Monthly Magazine. Volume V, (Ihling Bros, Publishers and Proprietors, 1874) at p. 647. 70

Certainly, Freemasons were standing on two different sides during this war and it included the fact that it divided the Anglican Church, too. It would eventually become the Episcopal Church in the United States and basically secede from the authority of Britain. Anti-Masonic sentiments were not very visible during that period but could include some suspicion that American Freemasons could be connected to notably more secularized Continental Lodges in Europe. Such people as abbot Augustin de Barruel in France, who believed in the larger Masonic conspiracy behind the French Revolution, and a professor of natural philosophy at Edinburgh University, John Robison, who shared anti-French and anti-Jacobin sentiments.199 George Washington was aware of such beliefs and did not stay aside, and did read them and defended the fraternity alongside those Protestant pastors and friends, who were not sharing the anti-Masonic polemic. It can be clearly seen from Washington's letter written by him to Reverend G. W. Snyder, the one who sent him Robison's book.200 It all sequentially leads to the next period, the Anti-Masonic period in North America.

III

Anti-Masonic Party

This period was marked with probably one of the most negative conflicts between the fraternity of Freemasons and the Protestant denomination. It was seriously possible for the Freemasonry in the United States to become illegal, however, such views were not shared by all in there, and the mere fact of the presence of the American Constitution, and memorable Freemasons such as George Washington in the American history have not allowed the next, more radical steps. The sentiment could be brewing among different Protestant groups [partly Congregationalists] in America, possibly the spread of anti-Masonic pamphlets such as Samuel Prichard’s Masonry Dissected and some others.201 The major conflict began with the disappearance of William Morgan who was supposedly a Freemason that was planning to uncover something about his Lodge in a book or pamphlet. It happened in the town of Batavia, New York on September 12, 1826, so nobody had seen him after.202 It cannot and could not be proved that he was murdered by his former brethren from any Lodge in the area, it was also known that it all led to accusations and many arrests, some people were convicted, but not for the murder itself. It was all enough to begin the wide suspicion and basic hate against the organization. Freemasons themselves have strongly accused the murder of Morgan and called for a thorough investigation, adding that if anyone in the organization was participating, then that individual should be severely punished. Here is an excerpt from A.P. Bentley’s book, History of the Abduction of William Morgan: And the Anti-Masonic Excitement:

Mr. Brown, although not himself a mason, avers that at this meeting, of those who took an active part in the proceeding, that some of the more respectable Free-masons were the foremost to

199 See J. Robison, Proofs of a Conspiracy against all the Religions and Governments of Europe, (London, 1797). 200 The Writings of George Washington from the Original Manuscript Sources 1745-1799 Volume 36 August 4, 1797-October 28, 1798, (Best Books on, 1939) at p. 452. 201 William Preston Vaughn, The Anti-Masonic Party in the United States: 1826-1843, pp. 1-2. 202 Ibid., p. 1. 71

institute an investigation, and declared that if any members of the Order had been guilty of kidnapping and murdering Morgan or whoever had committed such an outrage should be punished to the full extent of the law…203

The account was part of the polemic that began after the alleged kidnapping of Morgan. Some members of the Masonic Lodges around the country began to feel more public pressure and even decided to leave while becoming openly Anti-Masonic [the example of Elder David Barnard and his pamphlet Light on Masonry].204 Juries and trials kept on going for years on [well until 1831] but completely failed to accuse any particular person in the murder of Morgan.205 The whole issue turned to be known as the Morgan Affair and led to accusations that were not previously seen in any Protestant country before. It was not a purely political issue, the Anti-Masonic Party did not have any serious program, but the one stated in its very title, but it succeeded in creating the social uproar or better to say, the social and familial movement, deeply rooted in the feeling that Freemasonry is somehow distracting men from participating in the church life.206 It's quite typical for wives and female relatives of Freemasons to accuse men of gathering together and keeping some secret, moreover, some even believe that it truly distracts them from the family life, the church, or congregation meetings. Common logic always followed the principle that if people meet together without much evidence provided, especially if they have some rituals, then most likely they are involved in something really sinister and magic. This is the reality of Freemasonry today, but back then the Morgan Affair was enough to extend it to maximum, fueling it with suspicions of the sinister cult-like process in the Lodges. Certainly, the study should not be subjective and the possibility of such a kidnapping could take place including murder, the fact of a kidnapping itself though was almost proved after three of those that were accused pleaded guilty of such an act [Canandaigua trials], and the highest sentence received for it was two years in a jail.207 Soon the anti-Masonic movement began to take its strengths up and later formed the political party that did not achieve that many goals, but had a social conundrum in the United States. The murder act was not proved, even if it did take place, then those members of the Lodges would get expelled and condemned, but the public was not really believing it. The New York governor DeWitt Clinton, then seen as the highest sitting Freemason in the state had published a proclamation in which he was urging justice and the right for fair trial, also he promised reimbursements to those, who could give the perpetrators up and bring them in [$300 to find and $100 after the verdict].208 In contrast to William L. Foxe’s view mentioned above that it touched merely social matters and not politics may be slightly argued, they could in fact get involved with politics. The wind was picking up and began to interconnect itself with politics that had nothing to do with the Morgan Affair or even religion, but many Puritans were convincing themselves and others that it was part of the faithful “crusade” against the mistrusted part of the society that may not be corresponding to the true Christian conduct [Anti-Mason’s position against those who belonged

203 A.P. Bentley, History of the Abduction of William Morgan: And the Anti-masonic Excitement of 1826-30, with Many Details and Incidents Never Before Published, (Van Cise & Throop, 1874) at p. 29. 204 Ibid., p. 31. 205 William Preston Vaughn, The Anti-Masonic Party in the United States: 1826-1843, p. 7. 206 William L. Fox, Lodge of the Double Headed Eagle, (University of Arkansas Press, 1997) at p. 41. 207 Vaughn, The Anti-Masonic Party in the United States, p. 7. 208 Ibid., p. 6. 72

to the Federalist Party, etc].209 It definitely became involved in the Andrew Jackson’s campaign and his opponent Henry Clay during the 1832 election campaign. Jackson was a Freemason and the whole issue was used in a purely political way with the Anti-Masonic Party backing such candidates as Henry Clay, McLean, Calhoun, and even J.Q. Adams.210 The Masonic anti- Christian position was something of much doubt because practically all Freemasons during that time were of Christian faith and Protestants in the United States. Personal views of many of them could vary, for example, some argue that George Washington himself was a Deist, but those were purely personal matters, which he could doubt too, his belief in Providence was not very deistic, and after all his views did not reflect the views of all Freemasons.211 The wind of this anti-Masonic campaign did not last long, it all came to a halt by the 1840s, however, the fraternity had experienced some serious decline before the American Civil War. Later these notions somewhat returned during the Christian revivalist period in America. Such famous evangelical preachers as Charles G. Finney in his book The Character and Claims of Freemasonry (1869) stated that if looked more carefully upon, the Freemasonry cannot be a part of the life of a Christian, and later into the second half of the nineteenth century Dwight L. Moody was also strongly convinced that Freemasonry and Christianity are incompatible.212

Catholicism and Freemasonry

Catholicism versus Protestantism

The chapter is going to discuss the differences and rifts between the Catholic Church and the society of Freemasons. Why did they differ so much and even until the twenty-first century there was no reconciliation or at least the lift of all Papal bans that haunted Freemasonry for centuries. On one hand, there is no religion of Freemasonry or something that may be called the cult [though there are some elements of it if thinking about the concept of the Grand Architect of the Universe]. Basically, both should not be rivalries, however, the Catholic Church in the 1730s began to see the latter club of men as something sinister, Anti-Catholic, and dangerous to society. The argument may go in the direction of this particular rift, but it may also discuss another reason, which lays in the differences between the Catholic Church and the Protestant Reformation. The attempt to unite people without any religion or by inventing another religion of humanist thought existed in Europe among many humanists, it was already discussed previously when describing the situation caused by the wars of religion.

209 Milton Viorst, Fall from Grace: The Republican Party and the Puritan Ethic, (Simon and Schuster, 1971) at p. 27. 210 William Graham Sumner, Andew Jackson, (Houghton Mifflin Company, 1888) at p. 255. 211 Edited by Don Higginbotham, George Washington Reconsidered, an article by Peter R. Henriques, The Final Struggle between George Washington and and the Grim King: Washington’s Attitude Toward Death and an Afterlife, (University of Virginia Press, 2001) at p. 258. 212 Edited by Henrik Bogdan, Jan A.M. Snoek, Handbook of Freemasonry, an article by Guy Liagre, Protestantism and Freemasonry, (BRILL, 2014) at pp. 169-170. 73

Eventually, it was all divided into three directions, Catholic, Protestant, and humanist; all of them could interconnect or go against each other, too. Nevertheless, the society of Freemasons, which inherited the traditions and customs of the stone-masons [operatives] and professional guilds had appeared in Protestant England and ever since was more tolerated in the Protestant countries than anywhere else. Traditions of many Protestant denomination(s) required self- governing [ex. Congregationalists, Baptists], did not answer to one single authority and therefore asked for more pluralism in order to protect its rights to exist. It may be the reason why almost deistic society began in this kind of pluralistic environment in England [particularly after the Act of Indulgence (1687) and later the Glorious Revolution of 1688]. Second, England could have a stronger tradition of keeping the guilds [since the Anglo-Saxon era; also discussed in the chapter about origins of Freemasonry], and later tea or coffee houses where different matters could be discussed. Eventually, it all led to a Catholic suspicion that particularly Protestants tolerate Freemasonry, which they did, and the Protestant countries are somewhat involved in the war against Papal authority. In other words, it was not really the Catholic Church going against the speculative Masonic societies of the 1720s and 1730s, but the Protestant world in general. Later on more reasons were added and proclaimed in the Papal Bull of 1738 [Clement XII] that prohibited Freemasonry and made it seriously anti-Catholic; the Bull was upheld by Benedict XIV in 1751.213 Hence, the Freemasons themselves were not contradicting their religion, and Catholics were not and are not today prohibited from joining the Lodge and in return cannot participate in the Catholic Communion. Theological reasons are arguably part of the explanation why they cannot do so, but the more tectonic reason is the Protestant factor. In contrast, the rift between the Orthodox and Catholic branches of Christianity in 1054 was caused by the concept of the filioque, and Papal claim to be the head of the Church, but only from a theological point of view, politically it was a split between the Byzantian Imperial authority and the Pope.214 It may be argued that theological explanation to prohibit Freemasonry was in fact caused by the greater division between the Catholic Church and Protestant denominations. The latter were indeed in better relations with the Freemasons because were in need of more pluralism because the further logic could go in the following direction - first the Lodges become illegal and lager now Protestant ban gets placed upon them, and later the ban could continue prohibiting smaller and larger Protestant communities, which actually fought for the right to exist. The Protestant world did develop the principle of freedom to each gathering or no freedom to any gathering. Therefore, Freemasons had to be tolerated, even though they are not a religion in its classic theological form. The Grand Architect of the Universe may be seen as the so-called collective deity in Freemasonry which is supposed to unite different views on religion or religions of brothers.215 The emergence of such an organization within the mainframe of Protestant countries was supposed to be seen as the opposition to Catholicism by the Pope in the day when religion and politics were closely related, even though such a connection never really ended to this day. How different were the Protestant countries from those which remained loyal to the authority of Rome? General changes and particularly common European processes such as the same style of dress, or music,

213 Sara Ann Frahm, The Cross and the Compass, (Palibrio, 2014) at p. 77. 214 David Guretzki, Karl Barth on the Filioque, (Ashgate Publishing, 2009) at p. 9. 215 Mark Stavish, Freemasonry: Rituals, Symbols & History of the Secret Society, (Llewellyn Worldwide, 2007) at p. 11. 74

the same feudal structure that was already mixed with the growing power of early capitalism and mercantilism [specifically in colonial powers] still meant that by the 1700s Catholicism and Protestant world were strongly divided, and simply could not accept the foreign agent that was active in their countries. For example, Jesuits were seen as the spies of Rome in Britain and in many countries could be prohibited from visits or other establishments. Lord Charles Sackville had established the first Lodge in Italy in 1733 and almost immediately it drew suspicion from the Church.216 Additionally, what could draw the suspicion was the Oath itself. It simply meant that brothers of any Lodge would not be able to give totally honest confessions to priests, therefore totally contradicting the teaching of the Church on the sacrament of confession. The Catholic Church did not develop something that became more possible in the Protestant world. The Vatican was practicing one big monopoly on moral and ideological authority, not because it did not experience Renaissance or there was no art and literature, quite contrary, it just simply could not tolerate gatherings it could not control.

Spain and Portugal versus Britain

These two countries were going through a conflict of interests, political rivalries, and religious misunderstandings since the 1500s when the Church of England became independent from the Papal control. However, some of the rivalries could be traced to even earlier times when the big race for reaching new lands overseas was on since the late 1400s. Spanish interests were seriously contradicting the interests of England and in return, England was on the way to rivaling Spain. What added to this constant hot and cold war was denominational difference and it gave sort of ideological division between them as it was elsewhere in Europe. Definitely, the organization of Freemasons was of English kind in Spain, always suspected of having connections to the British royal court, especially considering how many British nobles were in charge of it. Theoretically, Rome could see the spreading of Freemasonry in the Catholic countries as a threat from Protestantism, but particularly Spain could view it as another spying mission from Britain, under the cover of a humanistic, irreligious society of stone-cutters, who are not really carving the stone anymore, but do something behind the closed doors under the Oath. Undertakings set up by the Inquisition, particularly after 1738 were severely harsh in comparison to any other place or region of Europe. It was introduced there in 1728 by the English Freemasons, in supposedly small numbers, however, after the Papal Bull that prohibited Freemasonry, the real persecutions had begun. Here is what was found in the Masonic Monthly magazine published in 1882 in London.

The Jesuit, Joseph Torrubia, by feigning great sympathy for the institution, got himself initiated [in 1751 got the decree against Freemasons from Ferdinand VI., O.K], having obtained previously from the Pope exoneration of the oath he had to take. Then he travelled over Spain to find out who were members, finally denouncing to the Inquisition the names of all the Masons

216 Edited by Henry Leonard Stillson, William James Hughan, History of the Ancient and Honorable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons, and Concordant Orders, (Fraternity Publishing Company, 1893) at p. 495. 75

of the ninety-seven Lodges then existing, who were condemned to death. In consequence of the great severity exercised, Freemasonry was scarcely ever spoken of for more than fifty years.217

This level of punishment and condemnation did not last forever because eventually Freemasons of Spain were organized by their nobility, which probably became interested in the then [1780s] very popular all European fraternity. It may be doubtful that Torrubia found 97 Lodges in Spain at that time, but his involvement was certain in identifying Freemasons and giving them into the hands of the Inquisition. Count Aranda was the noble who had eventually established the Grand Lodge of Spain [around 1767] and around that time there are no records of too many Lodges that could be identified by the Inquisition, which surely did not welcome them. Soon after 1738, the Inquisition was able to find the Lodge probably consisting not more than eight members, so all eight were arrested, prosecuted, and sent not more and not less, but to the galleys.218 It was purely the secret society because anything associated with it was under suspicion and rigorous oversight. Another account said that the first Lodge in Spain was installed by the Duke of Wharton in 1728, later, some Lodges were meeting at the house of British Ambassador [1753] and merely this fact could be more than suspicious not just to the Inquisition, but to Spain's governmental authorities.219 Religion was participating in the process for sure, but certainly, politics had to be involved in the very nature of political differences between Britain and Spain. Their colonial possessions, wishes of each other to somewhat undercut them and limit the might and power of the adversary could not be unreflected upon the Freemasonry because of the latter’s British origin. Religious differences between the two countries were adding to the whole process of prohibitions taken by the Pope that were later fully accepted by the Kings Philip V who had re-stated the Papal Bull of 1738 in Spain in 1740 and Ferdinand VI with his dispatch of Torrubia. In other words, it may be argued that Freemasons in Spain were seen not simply as those who did not correspond to the Catholic catechism, but also as potential spies and agents of Britain. It was really the old game of politics and power.

Additionally, it should be said that the whole standing of Freemasonry in Spain was clearly not contradicting its situation in neighboring Portugal. It was introduced in there by some French and later re-introduced by the English Freemasons in 1736 in Lisbon under the mastering of Mr. George Gordon [who was a well-known mathematician], and such figures as Lord George Graham and Lord Forrester, all belonging to his Majesty’s Fleet.220 The most sad event that involved the beginnings of Freemasonry in Portugal should certainly mention the case of Coustos, Mouton, and Brasle. The first was born in Switzerland, but migrated to England with his father, later settling in Lisbon for the purpose of establishing the merchant business. In 1743 all three had installed the Lodge there but were soon arrested and tortured by the Inquisition.

Coustos was within the space of three months subjected nine times to the rack, scourged, branded, and otherwise tortured, and-June 21, 1743-he figured as a principal personage at an auto-da-fe in

217 The Masonic Monthly, July to December, (London, 1882) at p. 372. 218 Robert Freke Gould, The History of Freemasonry, Volume 6, (London, Thomas, C. Jack, 1887) at p. 314. 219 Ibid., at pp. 313-314. 220 Ibid., at p. 307. 76

the Church of Dominicans. He was sentenced to four years at the galleys as a Protestant and Freemason - but his two companions, being Catholics, to five years of exile only.221

Coustos was saved by the British Embassy and both him and Mouton [also presumably saved by the British assistance] came to London in 1744. Brasile had died notwithstanding the tortures. In other words, religion was part of this conflict, but also the presence of the English vs. Spain vs. Portugal had to participate in it, and the mere fact that Coustos was prosecuted not just for being a Freemason but also the Protestant, who was also directly connected to Britain. These were two worlds and two absolutely different views of Protestant England [where Catholics and Jesuits could also find themselves in a very difficult situation; get deprived of property, save themselves by running away or prohibited from serving at court] and the Catholic south-western Europe. Peculiarly that even Jesuits were prohibited in Portugal in 1761, many prominent people had to leave Portugal and the infamous Portuguese mathematician and a Freemason, Da Cunha, was imprisoned by the Inquisition from 1778 until 1780.222 Such acts were clearly not very honest and may not be explained merely through the conflict between Spain, Portugal, and Britain, but Jesuits were not welcomed too, meaning that it was not just Catholics against the Enlightenment, but certain fractions against the other, politics of the Iberian countries versus Britain that was also not the most peaceful country in those days. Catholic position in Britain during the very same time was far from perfect and may require another book to describe it; they were almost on the same level with atheists, and could not practice the same level of freedoms as members of the Protestant denomination.

III

France and Britain

The chapter is not called France versus Britain or vice versa for a few reasons. The first one is that even though both countries belonged to mostly different denominations, Freemasonry was more welcomed in France [before 1789] than in the lands of its southern neighbors. It came to France from Britain often using the Huguenot channels with the assistance of Dutch Lodges and despite the future prohibition by the Papal Bull continued to exist in France without that many obstacles. Therefore, versus was replaced with and. France is often considered to be the second country in the world of Freemasons, and number one by many French Freemasons, especially when looking at the unique position of the Grand Orient of France. Catholic Church in France did not fully prohibit the organization of Freemasons and remained more or less tolerant towards it, avoiding big arrests or practice of Inquisitorial methods upon it. As it was argued in the chapter on France, referring to Roger Dachez and his History of the Freemasonry in France, The Parliament of Paris did not vote on accepting the Papal Bull of 1738, thus making Freemasonry legal in France and its colonies.223 It must be particularly important to understand that the Catholic Church in France itself was also practicing a great deal of independence from Rome, not literally, but practically. The Gallican

221 Ibid., pp. 307-308. 222 Claud-Antoine Thory, Acta Latomorum, ou chronologie de l'histoire de la franche-maçonnerie Française et étrangère, (Dufart, 1815) at p. 123. 223 Roger Dachez, Histoire de la Franc-Maçonnerie Française. Que sais-je? p. 53. 77

Church [Catholic Church in France] was able to sometimes argue with the Papal judgments on canon law and liturgical practices, also it could protect the French monarchy from many of the direct influences from the Vatican.224 It was practicing more freedom within itself, and by making it possible was relying upon its own judgments and particular power of its cardinals such as Richelieu, Mazarini or Fleury. One interesting account may be cited in full to show an example of such independence and personal interpretations given by the heads of the Gallican Church and the French Freemasons before 1789. The future event took place in France in 1737 and is mentioned in the book British Freemasonry 1717-1813, Volume 1.

FRANCE, in the Year 1737: this refers to the episode when Cardinal de Fleury and the head of the French police, Rene Herault, decided to ban meetings of Freemasons, probably because they were worried about the possible links of Lodge Coustos-Villeroy with the British Jacobites. On 14 September 1737, Chapelot, a wine merchant who had convened an assembly of Freemasons in his inn, was sentenced to pay a fine and his inn was closed. Yet the court sentence was not followed by more stringent measures and Fleury did not even order the local Parliaments to promulgate the Pope’s Bull in 1738.225

Such developments clearly show the difference between the Catholic Church in France, Portugal, and Spain giving a clear picture of how the same institution could tolerate or not the same subject. It provides an argumentative base for the hypothesis on why the fraternity of Freemasons in France managed to grow on the level of British and later North American, without being prosecuted on the level of Portugal and Spain. Political differences between Britain and France were maybe even sharper, especially during the Seven Years War, however, it did not put Freemasonry under more suspicion in France.

Another argument may be said about the general position of the Freemasons in France and their quickly growing traditions that could be distinctively of French origin or at least merely a local invention. Even though the tradition came from Britain, still it was not always seen as only the English organization in France, quite contrary it became an intricate part of the French history and customs. It may be no coincidence why the Grand Orient of France came about in France later on and carries one and particular French tradition. It may be presumed that as soon as the Freemasonry was introduced in France, it became very familiar with the local culture, and did not contradict its inner political issues, it simply became not very dependant on England and was not looking too suspicious in the eyes of such figures as Cardinal de Fleury or Rene Herault. As it can be read in the Freemason’s Chronicle published in 1894 with the special sanction of the Prince of Wales:

Bearing in mind the fact that English and French Freemasons are not on terms of friendliness with each other at the present time, England not considering French Freemasonry to be conducted in accordance with the true principles of the Craft, we suppose it must be conceded there is no obligation on the part of French

224 Peter McPhee, A Companion to the French Revolution, an article by Dale Van Kley, The Ancien Regime, Catholic Europe, and the Revolution’s Religious Schism, (John Wiley & Sons, 2014) at p. 132. 225See edited by Robert Peter, British Freemasonry 1717-1813, Volume 1, (Routledge, 2016), and P. Chevallier, Histoire de la franc-maçonnerie française, Volume 1, (Paris: Fayard, 1974) at pp. 24-29. 78

Freemasons to recognize the ordinary principles of jurisdiction, which prohibit one Grand Lodge from creating subordinate bodies on territory already occupied...226

Differences in jurisdictional authority, distinctive local traditions of Masonic conducts and Constitutions that were prone to change [the following citation was particularly mentioning the Grand Orient of France], all these factors made each Grand Lodge or traditions of Freemasonry unique not only to the country of origin, but also to the country in which it was introduced. Freemasonry became more attractive to the local French nobility and even clergy that were interested in spending time with different people, from various countries without being stopped by authorities of any kind, clerical or secular. In other words, the major argument behind the tolerance procured towards Freemasonry in France before 1789 was the particular position of the Gallican Church and its own relative independence from Rome. Politically England and France were rivals for a long time, but it did not influence the legal position of the given fraternity in the latter country because its Catholic authority could exercise its own decisions and even change those ones that were prescribed the Papal authority. Additionally to this argument, the situation in Italy may be mentioned in short. Despite the fact that Italy was the center of Catholicism, its Freemasonry was not treated that badly as in Spain during the 1700s. There were attempts by the Gaston, the last representative of the Medici family to halt Masonic Lodges from working or the infamous 1738 Papal Bull which was reaffirmed by Cardinal Farras in 1739, still there was no real action, so by 1760, the Grand Lodge of Holland continued to establish new Lodges in Naples and elsewhere in Italy [1767 the Grand Lodge of Italy under the Duke Demetrio della Rocca].227 Powerful Italian nobles were the biggest factor behind the protection and retaining of Freemasonry. A similar situation had developed in the Austrian Empire where Emperor Francis I himself was a Freemason.

Freemasonry and Protestantism Today

Statistics

As it was already discussed before throughout the book, it was interesting to find out that Protestantism as one of the Christian denominations [subdivided into many smaller or larger groups that may differ a lot] tolerates Freemasonry more than others. Now, it may also be important to discuss the actual numbers, especially about the Freemasonry today. As it was more tolerated in the Protestant world, and if looking at its English [or generally British if considering Wales and Scotland as the countries which greatly contributed to the creation of this fraternity] and Protestant origin. The numbers will tell that it all remains to be true until this day and the biggest Masonic country is the United States. Most Freemasons live there giving more basis for the gossip about its Freemason establishment in the government, the

226 The Freemason’s Chronicle, Volume 39, (W.W. Morgan, 1894) at p. 17. 227 Emmanuel Rebold, A General History of Free-masonry in Europe, pp. 145-146. 79

gossip which never faded away, but somewhat may be backed by the actual facts apart from the Freemason President’s images on the American bills. As the Senate Congressional Record showed as of September 9, 1987 Freemasons incorporated 41 seats in the federal judiciary, about 50 % of the Senate Judiciary Committee, 18 senators, and 76 in the House of Representatives.228 Basically, it must be said that getting accurate numbers as of 2021 was not the easiest task because many Grand Lodges worldwide do not often publicly publish their statistics, so many numbers had to be taken from the more previous sources [1920s-1990s and 2010 period], and from the US sources. It must be added that when touching the subject of Freemasonry and statistics, it’s always very difficult to find valuable and clear sources that may prove or disprove memberships, especially when it comes to Europe because in most of the post-Soviet countries Freemasons still do not really show themselves. In France or Germany, many Freemasons have some memories from WWII when they were prosecuted there by the Nazi or Fascist regimes. Unlike in many Anglo-Saxon countries where Lodges openly publish their meeting hours and photographs, many European, Latin American, and Turkish Lodges remain to be more secretive. The fact that the Freemasonry in the United States was always the largest in numbers, it did not hide itself from the world as for example other Grand Lodges did due to a less tolerant environment. In the 1920s the number of Freemasons in the United States was slightly growing and in 1924 constituted 3,077,161, by 1941 this number had declined to 2,451,301 and by 1959 this number had increased up to 4,103,161.229 After 1960 the numbers began to decline and by 1991 went down to 2,452,676.230 If speaking about the UK these numbers are much lower, but also show something more or less peculiar, so according to the UGLE [United Grand Lodge of England] official website, the number of its members reaches up to 200,000.231 If any researcher may try to access other if any resources on the number of Freemasons in the countries where Protestantism is not the dominating religion [or countries where it dominates, but not the US or Britain] then these numbers will be staggeringly lower. According to Paul M. Bessel, a representative of the Grand Lodge of Washington D.C. [or the Grand Lodge of the District of Columbia] the numbers are quite low, but are much higher in the United States, Canada, and the UK, still mostly Protestant countries where Freemasonry was either founded as in the UK or later became very popular as in the US. If looking at the following chart the big exclusion is predominantly Catholic Ireland, but its proximity to the UK may explain the popularity and tolerance level. Moreover, many Freemasons may have access and share membership in the Lodges of Northern Ireland, too, and became included in the given statistics chart.

228 See John Ankerberg, John Weldon, Fast Facts on the Masonic Lodge, (ATRI Publishing, 2011). Section I: Introduction to Freemasonry. 229 George A. Mather, Larry A. Nichols, Masonic Lodge, (Zondervan, 1995) at p. 27. 230 Ibid., p. 27. 231The United Grand Lodge of England, ‘How Many Freemasons Are There?’ , accessed 28 Jan. 2021. 80

232

Overall statistics will also show the general decline in numbers of Freemasons, and even in the United States where Freemasonry seems to be more popular than in other countries, this tendency is very obvious.

233

232 International Masonic Statistics - Graphs, Maps, Charts, , accessed 28 Jan. 2021. 233 Masonic Statistics - Graphs, Maps, Charts, , accessed 28 Jan. 2021. 81

234

For certain these charts and numbers provide crucial information on the fact that Freemasonry is located predominantly in the Protestant countries. Thus, the levels of tolerance there are much higher, supporting the idea that this particular Christian denomination is remaining tolerant towards Freemasonry and shares something that may be called peaceful and mutual coexistence.

Tolerance

The levels of tolerance towards Freemasonry in the modern world may also vary significantly, depending on the country, its origin, and religious affiliation. Protestant denominations seem to continue the old pattern of being generally more tolerant even though it does not mean that all of them are the same. The most lenient is the Anglican Communion, and one of the major reasons might be laying in the fact that had always existed in this denomination in England and within the English [British] aristocracy before. This denomination had formed during the very process of inner Protestant clashes when such groups as Dissenters asked for more freedom of conscience and faith in the kingdom and were eventually granted with them in 1687 and 1689 with two tolerance Acts. It was mentioned in the previous chapters that the Act of Indulgence was enacted in England by the Catholic King James II and the following, Act of Toleration of 1689 came about after the Glorious Revolution of 1688 produced by the Protestant monarchs William and Mary, and excluded Catholics from it. Nevertheless, the Anglican Church had learned how to tolerate its opponents in the age and

234 Ibid., Masonic Statistics, , accessed 28 Jan. 2021. 82

time of Enlightenment because it simply could not keep one hundred percent monopoly over the hearts and minds of its subjects. Later on, England would begin to set up laws and regulations that enabled Catholics to integrate into the more tolerant British society after the Toleration Act of 1791 during the nineteenth century.235 Unlike the Catholic Church, it did not have an absolute and overwhelming monopoly in Britain and its colonies, so it simply had to accept differences, and particularly the freedom of private gatherings that were always popular among English [and British in general]. The whole pub and teahouse culture played some significant role behind the formation of many clubs [Hellfire Club], the Odd Fellows, and surely Freemasonry, too. This particular trait of the British society, especially in large cities was one of the reasons why these societies were tolerated and came into existence. Anglican Church was also always directly connected to the Royal Family and as of now is headed by Prince Edward, Duke of Kent, whose father Prince George and a son to King George V was also the Grand Master of the United Grand Lodge of England.236 Additionally, the Church itself was becoming more tolerant towards the society of Freemasons all along the way of its history, and eventually, the former Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams had apologized for his previous anti-Masonic beliefs in 2003 and at least from his personal standpoint had welcomed Freemasons.237 This Church, alongside the Episcopal Church in the US, is seen as the most tolerant Protestant organization when it comes to Freemasonry. The situation may differ from one Protestant denomination to another, and there is no complete agreement. the 2014 issue of the Handbook of Freemasonry stated that the Evangelical Lutheran Synod in the United States does not see the Freemasonry and the Christian faith as compatible with each other; the Southern Baptist Convention had published two reports in 1993 and 2000 stating that at least eight principles found in Freemasonry may be incompatible with the Christian faith.238 Eventually, it may be clearly judged that the previously stated principle of many voices in the Protestant communities, and the lack of one particular authority amongst the Protestant Churches makes many variations. Different opinions often coincide with more conservative or more liberal views on Christianity and particularly when it comes to organizations that may somewhat challenge the authority of the local Church. Possibly this belief that Freemasons may challenge that authority causes most of the suspicions, however, Protestantism remains to be the most tolerant denomination(s) to Freemasons and sort of continues the old tradition of incorporating many famous Freemasons from the nobility into its ranks with the Duke of Kent being the best example of it. It’s often corresponding with the current laws in practically all the countries where Protestantism is predominantly an overwhelming religion, and any possible attempt to exempt Freemasonry from one or another denomination, especially if it already incorporated Freemasons, may cause an uproar. Therefore, in order not to turn away many established Freemasons from its ranks, such situations are not leading to any serious cases or confusions though they can take place. In 1987 the Presbyterian Church of Queensland had

235 John Morris, Catholic England in Modern Times, (Burns and Oates, 1892) at p. 34. 236 Grand Master, , accessed 29 Jan. 2021. 237 Rowan Williams apologises to Freemasons, an article by Chris Hastings and Elizabeth Day, , accessed 29 Jan. 2021. 238 Edited by Henrik Bogdan, Jan A.M. Snoek, Handbook of Freemasonry, an article by Guy Liagre, Protestantism and Freemasonry, (BRILL, 2014) at pp. 180-181. 83

stated that Freemasonry is nothing less but a religion [gathering in the Temple, swearing Oaths on different Holy texts, etc] in itself and does not see the Bible as the only source of Salvation while possessing syncretic and eclectic beliefs that strongly diverge from the Christian principles.239 On the other hand, the position of the EKD [Evangelical Church in Germany] has been very liberal since 1972 and maybe quoted here in full.

A general objection against a membership of an evangelical Christian in Freemasonry cannot be raised from the point of view of the evangelical participants. The decision of a membership in Freemasonry must be left to the individual following his own free decision.240

A similar position is shared by the Swedish Church that belongs to the evangelical Lutheran branch and includes many local Freemasons that also for a long time could incorporate Kings and members of the Royal Family.241

239 Ibid., pp. 181-182. 240 Reinhold Dosch, Deutsches Freimaurer-Lexikon, (Die Bauhütte, 1999) at pp. 155-170. 241 Henrik Bogdan, Jan A.M. Snoek, Handbook of Freemasonry, p. 180. 84

Conclusion

The whole varietу of issues that were discussed in this study were built upon the structure of chronology and covered as much time and territories as possible. Technically, the major question on how two very opposite, but yet similar things could get along or at least tried to do so. Generally, there were three directions, Catholic, Protestant, and humanist which was closely related to science and secular development of human thought in Europe. As it was stated and re-stated by many Freemasons around the world and history that they are not a religion, however, there are elements of one, though not insisting, but reminding of Manicheism in its attempt to unite all religions and the clear posture of Deism. These ideas were born during Renaissance Europe, produced more development in the period of Reformation and later on, in the Age of Reason and Enlightenment. However, the main question was what unites and disunites Freemasonry and Protestantism, how it happened that the Protestant thought became much more adaptable to tolerate such a secret society [or the society with secrets] that was appearing to be as the rival to any existing denomination. The study came into the clear analysis of history and processes that surrounded the Reformation, humanism, the position of the Catholic Church, and Freemasonry itself arriving at the conclusion that the Reformation itself was able to create freedom from ideological monopoly in Europe. Basically, if one total position [in this case proclaimed by the Catholic Church] cannot and could not be questioned, at some point was indeed questioned and publicly challenged by others, then it simultaneously opened the door into more questioning and establishment of other groups and institutions with their own view on the world, and particularly God. Additionally, the religious warfare made many people think about how is it possible that so many Christians can go into a war with one another and God simply oversees it and takes no action. Such thoughts were developing in the minds of many humanists, and the Reformation itself indulged in the process because it was involved in setting the question itself with the biggest moral authority of that time, the Catholic Church. Eventually, different forces of making compromises as it was in Germany during the wars of religion [peace agreements of Augsburg and Passau, later on, the signing peace of the same type of agreement in Westphalia in 1648, etc], made things appear in such a way that if one group is allowed then others may also be allowed or at least somehow tolerated - even if that toleration period is not going to last for too long. The Anglican Church had technically replaced the authority of Rome at set its own instead, but one such authority of question, its monopoly was thrown out, then the monopoly of the Archbishop of Canterbury had to be questioned by yet more coming denominations and groups. Dissenters also wanted to exist not in the underground. As long as the latter group(s) came into existence and were legalized during the reigns of James II [who in return also tried to legally re-establish the Catholic Church under the protection of English law] and later Mary and William of Orange, then more groups and gatherings could establish themselves, too.242 Something that may be called the skeptical questioning was brought in by

242 Jacqueline Rose, Godly Kingship in Restoration England: The Politics of The Royal Supremacy, 1660–1688, (Cambridge University Press, 2011) at p. 164. 85

the Protestant Reformation and could not be erased or set to be gone away at any cost because each new wave of more questioning was already set by the given pattern. Deists and universalists, secret atheists and free-thinkers, all of them were practically looking at Luther and Calvin while asking, if they can then why we cannot set our own agenda?

When studying the history of Freemasonry it cannot be avoided to stumble upon the fact that it was indeed rooted in the Medieval guilds and fraternities of builders, whose structure and terminology was loaned by the future speculative Masons. If tolerance was born in the case of religious wars, promises, compromises, and different voices in the Reformation, then the Freemasonry was rooted in the humanist thoughts that wanted to act along with the growing scientific and geographic discoveries. At some point, many professional guilds began to blend with humanists during the 1600s, and eventually, the Freemasonry was established in shape and form as we know it today [later changes included Higher Degrees, redevelopment of the Ritual, etc]. It was also created during the time when Europe and particularly England [Wales, Scotland, Ireland] were split along the religious and political lines [ethnic issues could also be the factor], and there was the need amongst intellectuals to find some uniting arch, a space where they could free themselves from these divisions. It does not mean that Freemasonry was able to eliminate such differences in its ranks, however, it turned to be an attempt to do so, and in many ways, it turned to be quite successful. English traditions of gathering in the tea houses, pubs, and clubs were strongly connected to the tradition of guilds and became part of the English [or British] culture. One of the official Masonic journals titled Ars Quatuor Coronatorum called it an epidemic of clubs after the Restoration [meaning England after the English civil war and the reign of Charles II].243 England began to witness the whole bouquet of clubs and organizations such as Freemasons, Odd Fellows, Orange-men, Universal Leaguers, Congregational Dissenters, and many more.244 Freemasonry turned to be very popular among the noble and educated classes in many European countries not merely due to its very peculiar and beautiful rituals, but through ideas it had cyphered in its allegories and symbols. For some, it became the way to escape their traditional religious practices, for others it meant good connections, and for all, it gave the feeling of belonging to something friendly, but yet mystical. It sort of united different principles and concepts going from esthetics to philosophy. It was already said previously that Leo Tolstoy had divided Freemasons into four categories, one looks for connections, another simply wants to spend time well in the company of friends, the third one longs for mysticism and alchemy, and the last one searches for ways to change the world. Often all these four groups cannot get along with each other, and it was particularly the reason why one of the main characters in his War and Peace, Pierre Bezukhov had decided to leave the fraternity because when the latter one wanted to change the world and political system, searched for justice and progress, aristocrats and nobles only wanted to party or study alchemy. Of course, War and Peace is fiction, but was most likely written by Tolstoy after the real characters and after studying the real Masonic diaries and records. Possibly the best and most important thing which indeed had united Freemasons was the idea or concept of

243 Edited by G.W. Speth, Ars Quatuor Coronatorum: Being the Transactions of the Quator Coronati Lodge No. 2076, Volume 40, (W.J. Parre H, Limited, 1927) at p. 202. 244 The Index, A Weekly Journal of Politics, Literature, and News, Vol 4., No. 89, (London, 1864) at p. 242. 86

international, and later on classless [early Freemasons were dominated by aristocracy] relations.

Protestantism and Freemasonry turned to be very different, but yet similar. Born after Europe had experienced the Renaissance, it shared something indeed very revolutionary. Protestant thought is purely religious, Freemason concepts are more philosophical and merely with the elements or characteristics of religion [meeting in the Temple, Altar, Books of the Sacred Law, initiations, etc,] primarily reflected in the presence of the Grand Architect of the Universe as the unifying deistic deity. At least most Freemasons declare that it's not a religion, and this concept may be doubted or not depending on the angle from which to look at this fraternity. Both did not always experience good relations, and even in the twenty-first century, many Protestant denominations rejected joint membership in the Lodge and in the congregation. Nevertheless, English [British] cultural traditions and the general Protestant tolerance towards its own varieties of groups and dissents made these two organizations co- exist in relative peace. The Catholic Church had never accepted it, though not because it was less educated, it was very well educated [Catholic Europe was the source of Renaissance before Protestant Reformation came about], Spain was not alien to literature, arts, and cartography, it was actually ahead of many in Europe. The reason for rejection was the way Catholic Church saw its position and sees it today; it believes that Salvation cannot and is not ought to be obtained outside the Church, thus making Freemasonry an organization that rivals the very process of Salvation by adding something outside the Church. Often many ecclesiastical orders such as Franciscans and specifically Jesuits also could not get legalized and accepted by the Church right after their establishments [prohibition of Jesuits by the Pope Clemens XIV], however, they were developing with the ideas not contrary to the canon law and authority of the Popes.245 Freemasonry was developing in the post-Reformation Anglican England, the country which rivaled its opponents in the face of Spain, and required an Oath. These were the factors that have halted the Catholic Church and many other Protestant groups from accepting the fraternity of Freemasons. However, in practice, Protestants and Freemasons share more similarities than differences and remain to be more or less friendly.

245 Edward Henry Michelsen, The Popes and the Jesuits of the Present Century, (Darton and Company, 1860) at pp. 12-14. 87

Bibliography

The United Grand Lodge of England, ‘How Many Freemasons Are There?’ , accessed 28 Jan. 2021. International Masonic Statistics - Graphs, Maps, Charts, , accessed 28 Jan. 2021. Masonic Statistics - Graphs, Maps, Charts, , accessed 28 Jan. 2021. Masonic Statistics, , accessed 28 Jan. 2021. Grand Master, , accessed 29 Jan. 2021. Rowan Williams apologises to Freemasons, an article by Chris Hastings and Elizabeth Day, , accessed 29 Jan. 2021.

Anderson, James., The Constitutions of the Free-masons: Containing the History, Charges, Regulations, &c. of that Most Ancient and Right Worshipful Fraternity. For the Use of the Lodges, (William Hunter, 1723). Anderson, James., The Constitutions of the Free-Masons, (William Hunter, 1723). Ankerberg, John., Weldon, John., Fast Facts on the Masonic Lodge, Section I: Introduction to Freemasonry, (ATRI Publishing, 2011). Aquinas, Thomas., Hill, Edmund., Summa Theologiae: Volume 13, Man Made to God’s Image, (Cambridge University Press, 2006).

Avis, Paul., Beyond the Reformation?: Authority, Primacy and Unity in the Conciliar Tradition, (Bloomsbury Publishing, 2008). Ars Quatuor Coronatorum: Being the Transactions of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge # 2076, London, Volume 6, (W.J. Parre H, Limited 1893). A Masonic Review, Volume 74, (C. Moore, 1891). Banks, Bryan A., Erica Johnson, The French Revolution and Religion in Global Perspective: Freedom and Faith, an article by Bryan A. Banks, The Huguenot Diaspora and the Politics of Religion in Revolutionary France, (Springer, 2017). Baumgartner, Alexander., Nordische Fahrten: Skizzen und Studien, (Herder, 1889). Bloemendal, Jan., Norland, Howard., Neo-Latin Drama in Early Modern Europe, (BRILL, 2013). 88

Blake, Edith., The Realities of Freemasonry, (Chapman & Hall, 1879). Bogdan, Henrik., Snoek, Jan A.M., Handbook of Freemasonry, an article by Guy Liagre, Protestantism and Freemasonry, (BRILL, 2014). Bodan, Henrik., Western Esotericism and Rituals of Initiation, (SUNY Press, 2012). Bentley, A.P., History of the Abduction of William Morgan: And the Anti-masonic Excitement of 1826-30, with Many Details and Incidents Never Before Published, (Van Cise & Throop, 1874). Bell, [N. D’Anvers], Nancy, R.E., Elementary History of Art, (London, Asher & Co, 1874). Bejan, Theresa M., The Journal of Politics, Vol. 77, No. 4, an article Evangelical Toleration, (University of Chicago Press, October 2015). Bastian, Jean-Pierre., Protestantisme et Franc-Maçonnerie: de la tolérance religieuse à la religion de la tolérance? : [actes du colloque Protestantisme et Franc-Maçonnerie, organisé par le Grand Orient de France à Nantes, les 25 et 26 avril 1998, (Editions Maçonniques de France, 2000). Best, Paul., Mysteries Discovered, (London, 1647), Biddle, John., Twelve Arguments drawn out of Scripture, (London, 1647), A Confession of Faith touching the Holy Trinity, according to the Scripture, (London 1648), The Apostolical and True Opinion concerning the Holy Trinity revived and reasserted, (London, 1653). Chevallier, P., Histoire de la franc-maçonnerie française, Volume 1, (Paris: Fayard, 1974). Cohen, Norman, Sonny., William Allen: Chief Justice of Pennsylvania, 1704-1780, (University of California, 1966). Chaplin, J.W., The Michigan Freemason. A Monthly Magazine, (Ihling Bros, 1873). Chaplin, J.W., The Michigan Freemason. A Monthly Magazinе. 1878. Vol. 4. Carlyle, Thomas., History of Friedrich II of Prussia, Called Frederick the Great, (Tauchnitz, 1862). Campbell, James., Recovering Benjamin Franklin: An Exploration of a Life of Science and Service, (Open Court Publishing, 1999). Clarke, James, Freeman., The Annexation of Texas. A Sermon Delivered in the Masonic Temple on Fast Day, (Office of the Christian World, 1844). Chambers, Emprain., Chambers's Encyclopædia: A Dictionary of Universal Knowledge for the People, Band 6, (J.B. Lippincott & Company, 1870). Clark, Peter., British Clubs and Societies 1580-1800: The Origins of an Associational World, (OUP Oxford, 2000). Com. Hist. Mss, Report of the Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts, (starting from 1870). Carpenter, Audrey T., John Theophilus Desagulier: A Natural Philosopher, Engineer, and Freemason in Newtonian England, (Bloomsbury Publishing, 2011). 89

Craik, Lillie, George., The Pictorial History of England: Being a History of the People: As Well as a History of the Kingdom, (C. Knight, 1855). Dumenil, Lynn., Freemasonry and American Culture, 1880-1930, (Princeton University Press, 2014. Dosch, Reinhold., Deutsches Freimaurer-Lexikon, (Die Bauhütte, 1999). Domfeh-Boateng, Joseph., The Catholic Church, (Xlibris Corporation, 2014). Dickens, A.G., Reformation Studies, (A&C Black, 1982). Donaldson, Gordon., The Scottish Reformation, (Cambridge University Press, 1960. Davies, Gareth., Avbelj, Matej., Research Handbook on Legal Pluralism and EU Law, an article by Poul F. Kjaer, Claim-making and parallel universes: legal pluralism from Church and empire to statehood and the European Union, (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2018). Dachez, Roger., Histoire de la Franc-Maçonnerie Française. Que sais-je?, (PUF, 2003). Dunan-Page, Anne., The Religious Culture of the Huguenots, 1660-1750, an article by Simon Harvey and Elizabeth Grist, The Rainbow Coffee House and the Exchange of Ideas in Early Eighteenth-century England, (Ashgate Publishing, 2006). Dimitriadis, Haris., Epicurus and the Pleasant Life, (Lulu.com, 2018). Epstein, Steven A., Wage Labor and Guilds in Medieval Europe, (UNC Press Books, 1991. Ehrensperger, Kathy., Holder, Ward R., Reformation Readings of Romans, an article by Laurel Carrington, Erasmus’s Readings of Romans 3, 4 and 5 as Rhetoric and Theology, (A&C Black, 2008). Epstein, S.R., Prak, Maarten., Guilds, Innovation and the European Economy, 1400-1800, (Cambridge University Press, 2008). Edwards, John., Theologia Reformata, Vol I, (London, Lawrence, 1713). Frahm, Sarah., The Cross and the Compass: Freemasonry and Religious Tolerance in Mexico, (Palibrio, 2014). Frick, David A., Polish Sacred Philology in the Reformation and the Counter-Reformation: Chapters in the History of the Controversies (1551-1632), (University of California Press, 1989). Fort, George, Franklin., The Early History and Antiquities of Freemasonry: As Connected with Ancient Norse Guilds, and the Oriental and Mediæval Building Fraternities, (Bradley, 1881). Findel, J.G., History of Freemasonry From Its Origin Down to the Present Day, Translated from the Second German Edition, (London, Asher & Co., 1869). Fitzmaurice, Andrew., Humanism and America: An Intellectual History of English Colonisation. 1500-1625, (Cambridge University Press, 2003). Fox, William L., Lodge of the Double Headed Eagle, (University of Arkansas Press, 1997). 90

Goodman, A., Mackay, Angus., The Impact of Humanism on Western Europe During the Renaissance, (Routledge, 2014). Gould, Robert, Freke., The History of Freemasonry, Volume 6, (London, Thomas, C. Jack, 1887). Guretzki, David., Karl Barth on the Filioque, (Ashgate Publishing, 2009). Grell, Ole, Peter., The Scandinavian Reformation: From Evangelical Movement to the Institutionalisation of Reform, (Cambridge University Press, 1995). Gould, Robert, Freke., The History of Freemasonry: Its Antiquities, Symbols, Constitutions, Customs, Etc. : Embracing an Investigation of the Records of the Organisations of the Fraternity in England, Scotland, Ireland, British Colonies, France, Germany and the United States : Derived from Official Sources, Volume 1, (J. Beacham, 1884). Hefelbower, S.G., The Relation of John Locke to English Deism, (Chicago, 1918). Handbook on Freemasonry, an article by Guy Liagre, Protestantism and Freemasonry, (BRILL, 2014). Hudson, Wayne., The English Deists: Studies in Early Enlightenment, (Routledge, 2015). Holler, Mandred J., Timo Airaksinen, Hannu Nurmi, Finnish-German Yearbook of Political Economy, Volume 2, (Verlag Holler, München, 2019). Higginbotham, Don., George Washington Reconsidered, an article by Peter R. Henriques, The Final Struggle between George Washington and and the Grim King: Washington’s Attitude Toward Death and an Afterlife, (University of Virginia Press, 2001). Hirsch, Eric, Donald., Kett, Joseph F., Trefil, James, S., The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2002). Halliwell, James-Orchard., The Early History of Freemasonry in England, (Thomas Rodd, 1840). Ishay, Micheline., The History of Human Rights: From Ancient Times to the Globalization Era, (University of California Press, 2008). Jaeger, Werner., Humanism and Theology, (Marquette University Press, 1943).

Jacob, Margaret, C., The Radical Enlightenment: Pantheists, Freemasons and Republicans, (Cornerstone Book, 2006). Jensen, Mads, L., A Humanist in Reformation Politics: Philipp Melanchthon on Political Philosophy and Natural Law, (BRILL, 2019). Johnson, A.H., Europe in the Sixteenth Century 1494-1598: Period IV, (BoD - Books on Demand, 2018).

Jacob, Margaret C., The Radical Enlightenment Pantheists, Freemasons and Republicans, (London 1981). Joseph., Gottfried., Findel G., History of Freemasonry, translation from the second German edition, (Rare Books Club, 2012). 91

Krause, Gustav., The Growth of German Unity: An Historical and Critical Study, (D. Nutt, 1892). King, Margaret, L., The Renaissance in Europe, (Lawrence King Publishing, 2003). Knoop, Douglas and Jones, G. P., Freemasonry and the Idea of Natural Religion, (London, Printed for private circulation, 1942).

Knopp, Douglas., The Genesis of Freemasonry, An Account of the Rise and Development of Freemasonry in Its Operative, Accepted, and Early Speculative Phases, (Q.C. Correspondence Circle, 1978).

Kloss, Georg., Die Freimaurerei in ihrer wahren Bedeutung aus den alten und ächten Urkunden der Steinmetzen, Masonen und Freimaurer nachgewiesen, (O. Klemm, Leipzig, 1846). Kraye, Jill., The Cambridge Companion to Renaissance Humanism, an article by Kristian Jensen, The Humanist Reform of Latin and Latin Teaching, (Cambridge University Press, 1996). Kelly, James E., Thomas, Hannah., Jesuit Intellectual and Physical Exchange between England and Mainland Europe, c. 1580-1789, (BRILL, 2018). Lipson, Ann, Dorothy., Freemasonry in Federalist Connecticut, 1789-1835, (Princeton University Press, 2015). Lamport, Mark A., Encyclopedia of Martin Luther and the Reformation, Volume 2, (Rowman & Littlefield, 2017). Lindsay, Thomas, Martin., The Reformation, (T.&T. Clark, 1882). Locke, John., The Reasonableness of Christianity, (London, Seventh edition, 1764), Ligou, Daniel., Histoire des Francs-Maçons en France, (Privat, 2000). Lalor, Stephen., Matthew Tindal, Freethinker: An Eighteenth Century Assault on Religion, (A&C Black, 2006). Lucci, Diego., Scripture and Deism: The Biblical Criticism of the Eighteenth Century British Deists, (Peter Lang, 2008). Morris, John., Catholic England in Modern Times, (Burns and Oates, 1892). Messer, Peter C., Taylor, William, Harrison., Revolution as Reformation: Protestant Faith in the Age of Revolutions, 1688-1832, an article by William Harrison Taylor, Conscious of Their Own Idolatry. American Newspapers, the Suppression of the Jesuits, and American Religious Liberty, (University of Alabama Press, 2021). Michelsen, Henry, Edward., The Popes and the Jesuits of the Present Century, (Darton and Company, 1860). Mather, George A., Nichols, Larry A., Masonic Lodge, (Zondervan, 1995). 92

Mitchell, J.W.S., The History of Freemasonry and Masonic Digest [...] to which are Added the Old Charges and Ancient Regulations as Collated by Order of the Grand Lodge of England, in 1722, Volume 1, (Published by the author, 1859). Mackey, Albert G., Encyclopedia of Freemasonry and its Kindred Sciences, (L.H. Everts, 1889). McPhee, Peter., A Companion to the French Revolution, an article by Dale Van Kley, The Ancien Regime, Catholic Europe, and the Revolution’s Religious Schism, (John Wiley & Sons, 2014). Mackey, Albert G., Encyclopedia of Freemasonry and its Kindred Sciences, Volume 2: D-L, (Jazzybee Verlag, 2016). Mackay, Gallatin, Albert., An Encyclopædia of Freemasonry and Its Kindred Sciences, (L.H. Everts, 1889). Macoy, Robert., General History, Cyclopedia and Dictionary of Freemasonry: Containing an Elaborate Account of the Rise and Progress of Freemasonry and Its Kindred Associations-- ancient and Modern: Also, Definitions of the Technical Terms Used by the Fraternity, (Masonic Publishing Company, 1870). Massicot, Jean.., La Franc-Maçonnerie, (Lulu, 2010). Maine, Henry, Sumner., The Early History of Institutions, (J. Murray, 1890). MacCulloch, Diarmaid., The Reign of Henry the VIII: Politics, Policy and Piety, an article by D. MacCulloch, Henry VIII and the Reform of the Church, (Palgrave Macmillan, 1995). Morillo, Stephen., Warfare under the Anglo-Saxon Kings, 1066-1135, (Boydell & Brewer Ltd, 1997). Nummedal, Tara., Alchemy and Authority in the Holy Roman Empire, (University of Chicago Press, 2008). Oliver, George., The Historical Landmarks and Other Evidences of Freemasonry, Explained, (J.W. Leonard & Company, 1855). Pavlac, Brian A., Witch Hunts in the Western World: Persecution and Punishment from the Inquisition through the Salem Trials, (ABC-CLIO, 2009. Patterson, Oscar III., Rough Mason, Mason, Freemason, Accepted Mason, (Rowman & Littlefield, 2017). Patterson, Lee, Frederick., Hilles W., Literary Practice and Social Change in Britain, 1830- 1530, (University of California Press, 1990). Pratt, Foster., The Michigan Freemason. A Monthly Magazine. Volume V, (Ihling Bros, Publishers and Proprietors, 1874). Peter, Robert., British Freemasonry, 1717-1813 Volume 3, (Routledge 2016). Peter, Robert., British Freemasonry 1717-1813, Volume 1, (Routledge, 2016). Prior, Charles D. A., Burgess, Glenn., England’s Wars of Religion, Revisited, (Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 2013). 93

Pollmann, Judith., Religious Choice in the Dutch Republic: The Reformation of Arnoldus Buchelius, 1565-1641, (Manchester University Press, 1999). Peter, Robert., British Freemasonry, 1717-1813, (Routledge, 2016). Parsons, Edward (the Younger)., Histories of St. Bartholomew Day, (Halifax; sold by Holdsworth; Westley: London, 1824). Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the State of New York; One Hundred And Fourteenth Annual Communication, (New York Press, J.J. Little & Co, 1895). Ryrie, Alec., The Age of Reformation: The Tudor and Stewart Realms 1458-1603, (Taylor & Francis, 2017). Rugg, Henry W., The Freemason’s Repository, Volume 20, (E. L. Freeman & Son, 1891). Rose, Jacqueline., Godly Kingship in Restoration England: The Politics of The Royal Supremacy, 1660–1688, (Cambridge University Press, 2011). Reynolds, Matthew., Godly Reformers and Their Opponents in Early Modern England: Religion in Norwich, C. 1560-1643, (Boydell Press, 2005). Ramm, Bernard., Protestant Biblical Interpretation: A Textbook of Hermeneutics, (Baker Books, 1999). Rebold, Emmanuel., A General History of the Freemasonry in Europe, (Geo. B. Fessenden, 1867). Roussel, Napoleon., Catholic and Protestant Nations Compared: In Their Threefold Relations to Wealth, Knowledge, and Morality, Volumes 1-2, (John P. Jewett, 1855). Row, Augustus., Masonic Biography and Dictionary, (J.B. Lippincott & Company, 1868). Rebold, Emmanuel., A General History of Freemasonry: Based Upon the Ancient Documents Relating To, and the Monuments Erected by this Fraternity, from Its Foundation, in the Year 715 B.C., to the Present Time, (American Masonic Publishing Association, 1872). Robison, J., Proofs of a Conspiracy against all the Religions and Governments of Europe, (London, 1797). Spalding, John, Martin., The History of the Protestant Reformation, (J. Murphy & Company, 1875). Seaton, A.A., The Theory of Toleration under the later Stuarts, (Cambridge University Press, 1911). Son, Timothy D., Ritual Practices in Congregational Identity Formation, (Lexington Books, 2014). Safley, Thomas, Max., A Companion to Multiconfessionalism in the Early Modern World, an article by Benjamin J. Caplan, In Equality Enjoying the Same Favor”: Biconfessionalism in the Low Countries, (BRILL, 2011). Stillson, Leonard, Henry., Hughan, James, William., History of the Ancient and Honorable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons, and Concordant Orders, (Fraternity Publishing Company, 1893). 94

Speth, G.W., Ars Quatuor Coronatorum: Being the Transactions of the Quator Coronati Lodge No. 2076, Volume 40, (W.J. Parre H, Limited, 1927). Stavish, Mark., Freemasonry: Rituals, Symbols & History of the Secret Society, (Llewellyn Worldwide, 2007). Stillson, Leonard, Henry., Hughan, James, William., History of the Ancient and Honorable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons, and Concordant Orders, (Fraternity Publishing Company, 1890). Selinger, William., Parliamentarism, From Burke to Weber, (Cambridge University Press, 2019). Seligman, Edwin R.A., Publications of the American Economic Association, (Nov., 1887, Vol. 2, No. 5). Sumner, Graham, William., Andew Jackson, (Houghton Mifflin Company, 1888). Simons, John W., and Macoy, R., The Masonic Eclectic: Or, Gleanings from the Harvest Field of Masonic Literature, Volume 1, Ausgaben 1-12, (Masonic Publishing and Manufacturing Company, 1865). Smith, Captain George., The Use and Abuse of Free-masonry: A Work of the Greatest Utility to the Brethren of the Society, to Mankind in General, and to the Ladies in Particular, (Masonic Publishing and Manufacturing Company, 1866). Vicchio, Stephen J., George Washington’s Religion: The Faith of the First President, (Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2019). Vaughn, Preston, William., The Anti-Masonic Party in the United States: 1826-1843, (University Press of Kentucky, 2014). Tracey, James D., Erasmus of the Low Countries, (University of California Press, 1996). Tindal, Matthew., Christianity As Old as the Creation: Or, The Gospel, a Republication of the Religion of Nature, (Adegi Graphics LLC, 1999).

Tallett, Frank., Atkin, Nicholas., Religion, Society and Politics in France since 1789, (A&C Black, 1991). Thory, Claud-Antoine., Acta Latomorum, ou chronologie de l'histoire de la franche- maçonnerie Française et étrangère, (Dufart, 1815). Turner, Ralph V., Magna Carta: Through the Ages, (Pearson Education, 2003). Tolstoy, Leo., War and Peace, (New American Library, 1968). Tafel, R.L., Documents Concerning the Life and Character of Emanuel Swedenborg. Tindal, Matthew., A Letter to the Reverend the Clergy of Both Universities, concerning the Trinity and the Athanasian Creed, (London, 1694). Toland, John., Letters to Serena, Letters IV-V, (London, Lintot, 1704). Thory, Claude-Antoine., Histoire de la Fondation du Grand Orient de Paris, (Paris, 1812). 95

Tafel, R.L., Documents Concerning the Life and Character of Emanuel Swedenborg, (Swedenborg Society, British and Foreign, 1890). The Freemasons’ Magazine and Masonic Mirror, Volume 21, (Brother Henry George Warren, 2, Red Lion Court, Fleet Street, 1869). The Masonic Monthly, July to December, (London, 1882). The Freemason’s Chronicle, Volume 39, (W.W. Morgan, 1894). The Freemason and Masonic Illustrated. A Weekly Record of Progress in Freemasonry, Volume 8, (London, Bro. George Kenning, 1875). Tudhope, George V., The Discovery of Francis Bacon's Cipher Signatures in James Anderson's Constitutions of the Free Masons, (Health Research Books, 1993). The Freemason’s Chronicle, Volume I, an article Old Town Taverns Associated with Masonry, (Volume I, No. 7, 18th February 1875). The Michigan Freemason, Freemason’s Monthly, Article 3, an article by J.C. Neilson Freemasonry in Scotland (Chaplin & Ihling Bros, Publishers and Proprietors, 1872). The Masonic Review, Volume 53, (C. Moore, 1880). The Index, A Weekly Journal of Politics, Literature, and News, Vol 4., No. 89, (London, 1864). The Freemason’s Monthly Magazine, Volume 22, and article The Origin and Early History of the Fraternity of Masons, (Tuttle & Bennett, 1863). The Nation: A Weekly Journal Devoted to Politics, Literature, Science, Drama, Music, Art, Industry, Volume 15, (Nation Associates, 1872). The Writings of George Washington from the Original Manuscript Sources 1745-1799 Volume 36 August 4, 1797-October 28, 1798, (Best Books on, 1939). The Freemason’s Monthly Magazine, Volume 30, (Tuttle & Dennett, 1871). University of Oxford, Alumni Oxonienses: The Members of the University of Oxford, 1715- 1886, Volumes 3-4, (Parker and Company, 1888). Vaughn, William, Preston., The Anti-Masonic Party in the United States: 1826-1843, (University Press of Kentucky, 2009). Viorst, Milton., Fall from Grace: The Republican Party and the Puritan Ethic, (Simon and Schuster, 1971). Woodford, Adolph F., Kenning's masonic cyclopaedia and handbook of masonic archaeology, history, and biography, (Kenning, 1878). Wharton, Philip, Duke of Wharton., Memoirs of the life of ... Philip ... Duke of Wharton. By an impartial hand, (London, Printed for J. Wilford, behind the Chapter-House, in St. Paul’s Church-yard, 1731). Wharton, Philip., Almæ Matres: Dedicated, Without Permission, to the Freshmen and Dons of Oxford, (J. Hogg & Sons, 1859). Wriothesley, Chronicle, i. 152. See also The Reign of Henry the VIII, D. MacCulloch. 96

Whittemore, Henry., Freemasonry in North America from the Colonial Period to the Beginning of the Present Century: Also the History of Masonry in New York from 1730 to 1888 in Connection with the History of the Several Lodges Included in what is Now Known as the Third Masonic District of Brooklyn, (Artotype Printing and Publishing Co., New York, 1889).