THE FIRST WITNESSES OF LUCIFER
That the witnesses of Lucifer are in all cases attached to the Latin
Church, whether as priests or laymen, is no matter for astonishment when
it is once realised that outside this Church there is no hostility to
Masonry. For example, Robison's "Proofs of a Conspiracy" is almost the
only work possessing, deservedly or not, any aspect of importance, which
has ever been penned by a Protestant or independent writer in direct
hostility to the Fraternity. Moreover, Catholic hostility varies in a
vanishing direction with distance from the ecclesiastical centre. Thus,
in England, it exists chiefly in a latent condition, finding little or
no expression unless pressure is exercised from the centre, while in
America the enforced promulgation of the _Humanum Genus_ encyclical has
been one of the serious blunders of the present pontificate as regards
that country. The bibliography of Catholic Anti-Masonic literature is
now, however, very large, nor is it confined to one land, or to a
special epoch; it has an antiquity of nearly 150 years, and represents
most of the European continent. That of France, which is nearest to our
own doors, is naturally most familiar to us; it is also one of the most
productive, and may be assumed to represent the whole. We are concerned
with it in this place only during the period which is subsequent to the
alleged foundation of the New and Reformed Palladium. During this period
it falls obviously into two groups, that which preceded any knowledge of
the institution in question and that which is posterior to the first
promulgation of such knowledge. In the first we find mainly the old
accusations which have long ceased to exert any conspicuous influence,
namely, Atheism, Materialism, and revolutionary plotting. Without
disappearing entirely, these have been largely replaced in the second
group by charges of magic and diabolism, concerning which the
denunciations have been loud and fierce. One supplementary impeachment
may be said in a certain sense to connect both, because it is common to
both; it is that of unbridled licence fostered by the asserted existence
of adoptive lodges. We shall find during the first period that Masonry
was freely described as a diabolical and Satanic institution, and it is
necessary to insist on this point because it is liable to confuse the
issues. Before the year 1891 the diabolism identified with Masonry was
almost exclusively intellectual. That is to say, its alleged atheism,
from the standpoint of the Catholic Church, was a diabolical opinion in
matters of religion; its alleged materialism was a diabolical philosophy
in matters of science; its alleged revolutionary plottings, being
especially directed against the Catholic Church, constituted diabolical
politics. Such descriptions will seem arbitrary enough to most persons
who do not look forth upon the world from the windows of the Vatican,
but they are undeniably consistent at Rome.
Of actual diabolism prior to the date I have named, there is, I believe,
only the solitary accusation made by Mgr. de Ségur, and having
reference to a long anterior period. He states that in the year 1848
there was a Masonic lodge at Rome, where the mass of the devil was
celebrated in the presence of men and women. A ciborium was placed on an
altar between six black candles; each person, after spitting and
trampling on a crucifix, deposited in this ciborium a consecrated host
which had been purchased or received in church. The sacred elements were
stabbed by the whole assembly, the candles were extinguished at the
termination of the mass, and an orgie followed, similar, says Mgr. de
Ségur, to those of "Pagan mysteries and Manichæan re-unions." Such
abominations were, however, admittedly rare, and the story just recited
rests on nothing that can be called evidence.
During the years intervening between 1870 and 1891 we may search the
literature of French Anti-Masonry in vain for any hint of the Palladium.
In 1884 the collaboration of Louis D'Estampes and Claudio Jannet
produced a work entitled "Freemasonry and the Revolution," which
affirms that the immense majority of Masons, including those who have
received the highest grades, do not enjoy the confidence of the true
secrets, but the establishment of atheism in religion and socialism in
politics as designs of the Fraternity are the only secrets intended.
The New and Reformed Palladium connects with the Order of the Temple by
its supposed possession of the original Baphomet idol, but in 1882 this
was entirely unknown to Mgr. Fava, who denies all the reputed connection
between Templars and Masons, and traces the latter to Faustus Socinus as
founder, following Abbé Lefranc in his "Veil raised for the Curious." A
mystic and diabolic aspect of the Fraternity is so remote from his mind
that in his "Secret of Freemasonry" the Bishop of Grenoble affirms that
its sole project is to replace Christianity by rationalism.
The third and concluding volume of Père Deschamps' great compilation on
"Society and the Secret Societies," supports, on the contrary, the
hypothesis rejected by Fava. It recites much old knowledge concerning
adoptive lodges, the Illuminés, the Orders of Philalethes, of Martinez
Pasquales, and of Saint-Martin, on which subjects few writers indeed can
say anything that is new; but while specially devoted to the political
activity of the Fraternity all over Europe, Deschamps tells us nothing
of the conspiracy which produced the New Palladium, though the alleged
collaboration of Mazzini gave it a strong political complexion; of Pike
nothing; of Diabolism still nothing. I may add that his work claims to
be verified at all points.
In the year 1886 another ecclesiastic, Dom. Benoit, published two
formidable volumes on "Freemasonry and the Secret Societies," forming
part of a vaster work, entitled "The City of anti-Christ in the
Nineteenth Century." Like D'Estampes and Jannet, he distinguishes
between a small number of initiates and a vast crowd of dupes who swell
the ranks of the Fraternity. "Many Masons ascend the ladder of the
grades without receiving the revelation of the mysteries." The highest
functions of most lodges are said to be given to the dupes, while the
ruling chiefs are concealed behind humble titles. It is further
represented that in certain countries there are secret rites above the
ordinary rites, and these are imparted only to the true initiates, which
sounds like a vague and formless hint concerning a directing centre; but
so far from supposing that such an institution may exist in Masonry, the
author affirms that unity is impossible therein:--"Image of hell and
hell anticipated, Masonry is the realm of hatred, and consequently of
division. The leaders mutually despise and detest one another, and
universally endeavour to deceive and supplant each other. A common
hatred of the Church and her regular institutions alone unites them, and
scarcely have they scored a victory than they fall out and destroy each
other." The first seeds of the Manichæan accusation are found in the
second volume, but the term is not used in the sense of Albert Pike's
Luciferian transcendentalism, but merely as an equivalent of
Protestantism coloured by the idea of its connection with the Socinian
heresy. In conformity with this view, Dom Benoit attaches himself to
the Templar hypothesis, saying that the Albigenses and the Knights of
the Temple are the immediate ancestors of Masonry. But the point which
is of most interest in connection with our inquiry is where Dom Benoit
asserts that Satan is the god of Freemasonry, citing an obscure grade in
which the ritual is connected with serpent-worship, and another in which
the recipient is adjured "in the sacred name of Lucifer," to "uproot
obscurantism." It is, however, only a loose and general accusation, for
he says also that the Masonic deity is "the creature," that is,
humanity, the mind of man, human reason; it is also "the infamous
Venus," or the flesh; finally, "all divinities of Rome, Greece, Persia,
India, and every pagan people, are the gods of Masonry." This is merely
indiscriminate defamation which is without force or application, and the
writer evidently knows nothing of a defined cultus of Lucifer existing
in the Lodges of the Fraternity. So also when he elsewhere states that
sexual excesses are sometimes accompanied in Masonry by Eucharistic
profanations, he has only Mgr. de Ségur's out-of-date narrative to
support him, and when he hints at magical practices, it is only in a
general way, and apparently referring to acts of individual Masons. In
one more significant passage he records, as a matter of report, that
apparitions of the demon have occurred "recently" in Masonic assemblies,
"where he is said even to have presided under a human form." While there
is no mention of Palladism and none of Pike in his treatise, we may
regard Dom Benoit as a herald of the coming accusation, speaking vaguely
of things half heard.
Some time previous to 1888, Paul Rosen, a Sovereign Grand
Inspector-General of the 33rd and last degree of the French rite, had
come to the conclusion that the mysteries of Freemasonry are abominable,
and in that year he published a work, entitled "Satan and Co.,"
suggesting that in this case a witness to the desired point had at last
come forward, and, as a matter of fact, the writer does take us a few
paces beyond the point reached by Benoit. So far as I am aware, he is
the first French anti-Mason who mentions Albert Pike, with one
exception, to be considered separately in the next chapter. He describes
him as the Sovereign Grand Commander of the Supreme Mother Council of
every Supreme Council of the Ancient and Accepted Scotch Rite, and he
tells the story of the foundation of that Rite, but he knows nothing of
Isaac Long, the Palladium, or the skull. He cites also certain works
which Pike wrote for the exclusive use of initiates, apparently of the
higher grades of these rites, namely, "The Sephar H'Debarim," "Ethics
and Dogmas of Freemasonry," and "Legenda Magistralia." But so far from
accrediting the order with a supernatural aspect, he affirms that its
war-cry is annihilation and anathema thereto. The end of Freemasonry is,
in fact, social anarchy, the overthrowal of monarchical government, and
the destruction of the Catholic religion. The Satanism imputed to
Freemasonry by Paul Rosen is therefore of an arbitrary and fantastic
order, having no real connection with this inquiry. Two years later the
same author published a smaller volume, "The Social Enemy," which
contains no material of importance to our purpose, but is preceded by a
Pontifical Brief, conveying the benediction of Leo XIII. to the writer
of "Satan and Co."
We pass now to the year of revelation 1891.