ART SACERDOTAL
Some few months after the first testimonies to Palladism appeared, under
the signatures of the witnesses whom we have already examined, a fresh
contribution was made to the literature of Diabolism in its connection
with Masonry, by a work entitled "Freemasonry, the Synagogue of Satan."
The exalted ecclesiastical position of the author, Mgr. Léon Meurin,
S.J., Archbishop of Port Louis in Mauritius, gave new impetus and an
aspect of increased importance to accusations preferred at the
beginning, as we have seen, by comparatively obscure or directly
suspected writers. The performance, moreover, was apparently so learned,
in some respects so unlooked for, and withal so methodical, that it
became subsequently a source of universal reference in anti-Masonic
literature. To this day M. Huysman remains dazzled, and to those in
search of reliable information on the subject, he says:--"If you would
be saved from the excesses of unseated reason, and from narratives of
Dunciad dulness, try Mgr. Meurin; read the Archbishop on Palladism."
Within certain limits the advice is well-grounded; the art sacerdotal in
its application to Anti-Masonry may leave much to be desired, but as a
specimen of the superior criticism obtaining upon this subject in higher
circles, it offers a strong contrast to the general tone and touch among
the rank and file of the accusers. We are, in fact, warranted upon every
consideration, in expecting a valuable contribution to our knowledge;
but, I may say at once, that this expectation is unfortunately not
realised. With a keen philosophical anticipation one turns the pages of
"Freemasonry, the Synagogue of Satan," admires their beautiful
typography, lingers with delight over the elaborate appendix of
allegorical engravings, and experiences a brief sense of intellectual
inferiority in the presence of such formidable sections, and so
portentous a table of contents. It should be impossible to speak of the
Archbishop without a mental genuflexion, but it remains true that our
expectation is not realised. It will become us, at the same time, to
speak as tenderly as possible of a pious and learned prelate who has now
passed where Masons cease from Satanising and the thirty-three degrees
are at rest. But it must be said plainly that the contents of his very
large volume offer little to our purpose.
By the nature of his episcopal charge Mgr. Meurin had special facilities
for ascertaining how men diabolise; the island of Mauritius has enjoyed
many privileges of Infernus. There we lose sight of the Rosicrucians on
the road to India; there the Comte de Chazal initiated Dr Bacstrom, and
all this, of course, is diabolical from the standpoint of Anti-Masonry.
Moreover, it must not be forgotten that Mgr. Meurin, in a series of
wonderful conferences, has exhibited the superstitions of Mauritius,
and, accepting the test of M. Huysman, the existence of Black Magic in
this French colony is proved to hilt and handle by wholesale
Eucharistic depredations, the sacrifice of cats at midnight upon the
altars of rifled churches, and the discovery of the blood of the victims
in the chalices used for the elements. The Church does not stir in the
matter; it deplores and prays, which seems, in some respects, an
ineffectual method of protecting the _latens Deitas_. If the Eucharist
be liable to profanation, why reserve the Eucharist? Surely the
negligence which makes such profanations possible is the offer of
opportunity to Deicide, and great carelessness is cousin to condonation.
However this may be, Mgr. Meurin seems to have been quite the authority
to whom one would naturally refer for specific information upon
devil-worship as it obtains within his own diocese, even if apart from
Masonry. But he is too erudite to concern himself with individual facts,
and he so far transcends diocesan limitations as to forget Mauritius
completely. Another witness, who perhaps never visited Port Louis,
affirms that the Central Directory of the Palladium for Africa is
established in that place, but the prelate of Port Louis, from whom the
information would have been precious, seems acquainted with nothing of
the kind. The weapon of the mitred warrior is, at the same time, a
sufficiently portentous thesis, as follows:--that Freemasonry is
connected with Satanism by the fact that it has the Jews for its true
authors, and the Jewish Kabbalah for the key of its mysteries; that the
Kabbalah is magical, idolatrous, and essentially diabolical; that
Freemasonry, considered as a religion, is therefore a judaized
devil-worship, and considered as a political institution, it is an
engine designed for the attainment of universal empire, which has been
the dream of the Jews for centuries.
My readers will be inclined to consider that such a hypothesis, though
it may square with the Satanism of Adriano Lemmi, who, as we shall see,
is accused of circumcision, can hardly be brought into harmony with the
universal Masonry of Albert Pike, as the latter was neither Jew nor
Judaiser. But common hatred of the Catholic Church is, in the opinion of
Mgr. Meurin, a sufficient bond to identify the interests of both
parties. Let us start, therefore, with the archbishop's own hypothesis,
which he compresses into a single sentence: "To encircle the brow of the
Jew with the royal diadem, and to place the kingdom of the world at his
feet--such is the true end of Freemasonry." And again: "The Jewish
Kabbalah is the philosophical basis and Key of Freemasonry." Once more:
"The end of Freemasonry is universal dominion, and Freemasonry is a
Jewish institution."
Accepting these statements as points that admit of being argued with
deference to the rules of right reason, let us establish in turn two
positions which do not admit of being argued because they are evident in
themselves: (a) Where the significance of symbols is uncertain, it is
easy to interpret falsely; (b) When a subject is obscure and difficult,
no person is qualified to speak positively if his knowledge be obtained
at second-hand. Now, have we good reason to suppose that Mgr. Meurin is
possessed of first-hand knowledge, and is consequently in a position to
interpret truly upon the difficult subject he has undertaken, namely,
the esoteric doctrines of the Kabbalah? If not, we are entitled to
dismiss him without further examination. As a fact, in this preliminary
and essential matter the archbishop can stand no test. The antiquity of
the Kabbalah is necessary to work his hypothesis, and he assumes it as
if unaware that its antiquity had ever been impugned. There may be much
to be said upon both sides of this hotly-debated question, but there is
nothing to be said for a writer who seems ignorant that there is a
question. And hence my readers will in no way be astonished to learn
that his information is obtained at second-hand, or that his one
authority is Franck. This fact is the key to his entire work, and the
sole credit that is due to him is the skilful appearance of erudition
which he has given to a shallow performance, and the natural mental
elegance which has prevented him from being noisy and violent.
Our inquiry into modern devil-worship does not warrant us in discussing
the position of writers who choose to assume that the Kabbalah,
Gnosticism, and other systems are _à priori_ diabolical, because
assumptions of this kind are unreasonable. There are writers at this
moment in France who argue that the English word God is the equivalent
of Lucifer, but one does not dispute with these. For the satisfaction of
my readers, it may, however, be as well to state that the voluminous
treatise of Mgr. Meurin has come into existence because he has
discovered, as one might say, accidentally, that the number 33, which is
that of the degrees in French Freemasonry, is the number of the
divinities in the Vedas, thus creating a presumption that the mysteries
of Freemasonry connect with those of antiquity. Of course they connect
with antiquity, for the simple reason that there is a solidarity between
all symbolisms, and, moreover, it is perfectly clear that Masonry has
either inherited from the past by a perpetuated tradition, or has
borrowed therefrom. Mgr. Meurin had therefore as little reason to be
astonished at the correctness of his presumption when he came to work it
out as he had to be delighted with the inference which prevails
throughout his inquiry, namely, that the mysteries of pagan antiquity
were delusions of the devil, and that modern mysteries which connect
with those are also diabolical delusions. Indeed he is so continually
making discoveries which are fresh to himself, and to no one acquainted
with the subject, that one would be pleasantly diverted by his
simplicity if it were not for the bad faith which underlies his
assumptions. For example, every one who knows anything of Goëtic
literature is aware that the rituals of black magic incorporate
heterogeneous elements from Kabbalistic sources, but to Mgr. Meurin this
fact comes with the force of a surprise.
His Masonic erudition is about as great and as little as his proficiency
in Kabbalah; he quotes Carlyle as "an authority," applies the term
orthodox to French Freemasonry exclusively, whereas the developments of
the Fraternity in France have always had a heterodox complexion, while
his tripartite classification of the 33 degrees of that rite and of the
Ancient Accepted Scotch Rite is made in an arbitrary manner to suit a
preconceived theory, and entirely effaces the importance inherent in
the first three grades, which are themselves the sum of Masonry.
Moreover, the classification in question is presented as a most secret
instruction imparted in some fastness of Masonry outside the 33 degrees,
but no authority is named.
Such being the qualifications and such the methods of the archbishop, I
do not propose to accompany him through the long course of his
interpretations, but will supply instead, for the economy of labour on
the part of those who may wish to follow in his footsteps, a skeleton
plan of procedure by which they will be able to prove learnedly anything
they please in Freemasonry.
It is well known that the Fraternity makes use of mystic numbers and
other symbols. Take, therefore, any mystic number, or combination of
numbers, as _e.g._, 3 × 3 = 9. You will probably be unacquainted with
the meaning which attaches to the figure of the product, but it will
occur to you that the 9 of spades is regarded as the disappointment in
cartomancy. Begin, therefore, by confidently expecting something bad.
Reflect upon the fact that cards have been occasionally denominated the
Devil's Books. Conclude thence that Freemasonry is the Devil's
Institution. Do not be misled by the objection that there is no
traceable connection between cards and Masonry; anticipate an occult
connection or secret _liaison_. The term last used has probably occurred
to you by the will of God; do not forget that it describes a
questionable sexual relationship. Be sure, therefore, that Freemasonry
is a veil of the worst species of moral licence. You have now reached an
important stage in the unmasking of Masonry, and you can sum it as
follows:--Freemasonry is the cultus of the Phallus. If you know anything
of ecclesiastical Latin, the words _noctium phantasmata_ may perhaps
occur to you, and the whole field of demonology in connection with the
Fraternity will open before you. But if you would confine yourself to
the region of lubricity, recollect that our first parents went naked
till the serpent tempted them, and then they wore aprons. Hence the
apron, which is a Masonic emblem, has from time immemorial been the
covering of shame. Should it occur to you--vide _Genesis_--that God made
the aprons, dismiss it as a temptation of the devil, who would, if
possible, prevent you from unveiling him. By this time it will be well
to recur to the number 9; your chain of reasoning has established that
it possesses a horrible significance. Now take the number and follow it
through the history of religions by means of some theological
ready-reckoner, such as a cheap dictionary by Migne. You will be sure to
find something to your purpose--_i.e._, something sufficiently bad.
Place that significance against the use of that number in Masonry.
Repeat this process, picking up anything serviceable by the way, and
continue so doing till your volume has attained its required dimensions.
You will never want for materials, and this is how Masonry is unveiled.
There is no exaggeration in this sketch; Mgr. Meurin is indeed by far
more fatuous. On the 26th of May 1876 the Supreme Council of Sovereign
Grand Inspectors General of the 33rd Degree of the Ancient and Accepted
Scotch Rite are said to have issued a circular, dated from 33 Golden
Square, London. Will my readers believe their own eyes or my sincerity
when I say that the most illustrious of the French Anti-Masonic
interpreters, member of the Society of Jesus, and Archbishop of Port
Louis, solemnly enjoins us to "remark the No. 33 and the square of gold,
which signify the supreme place in the world assigned to the liberty of
gold"? By thus commenting on a significant number attaching to a real
address, situated, as everyone knows, in the most central district of
this city, Archbishop Meurin believes that he is not descending from
pleasant comedy into screaming farce of interpretation, but that he is
acting seriously and judiciously, has a right to look wise, and to
believe that he has hit hard!
No person who is acquainted with the Kabbalah, even in its historical
aspects, much less the ripe scholar, M. A. Franck, from whom the
materials are derived, will tolerate for a moment the theory that this
mystical literature of the Jewish nation is capable of a diabolical
interpretation. In particular it lends itself to the crude Manichæan
system attributed to Albert Pike about as much and as little as it does
to atheistic materialism. The reading of Mgr. Meurin may be compared
with that of Mirandola, who discovered, not dualism, but the Christian
mystery of the Trinity contained indubitably therein, who regarded it
with more reason as the bridge by which the Jew might ultimately pass
over to Christ, who infected a pontiff with his enthusiasm, and it will
be seen that the Catholic Archbishop looks ridiculous in the lustre of
his derived erudition. To insist further on this point is, however,
scarcely to our purpose. The Kabbalah does not possess that integral
connection with Masonry which is argued by Mgr. Meurin, and if it did,
does not bear the interpretation which he assigns it, while his
anti-Semitic thesis is demolished with the other hypothesis. But these
things are largely outside the question which concerns us most directly.
Over and above these points, does the witness whom we are examining
contribute anything to our knowledge on the subject of the New and
Reformed Palladium, otherwise Universal Masonry? The reply is perfectly
clear. His one source of knowledge is Adolphe Ricoux; by some oversight
he has not even the advantage of the rituals published by Leo Taxil. He
may, therefore, be dismissed out of hand. The Satanism which he exhibits
in Masonry is an imputed Satanism, and as to any actual Devil-Worship he
reproduces as true the clever story of _Aut Diabolus aut Nihil_, which
appeared originally in "Blackwood's Magazine," and has since been
reprinted by its author, who states, what most people know already, that
it is entirely fictitious.
In parting with the writer of "Freemasonry, the Synagogue of Satan," as
with a witness whose evidence has broken down, it must be repeated that
he has, by his exalted position, elegance of method, and show of
learning, been a chief pillar of the Satanic hypothesis.