THE RADIX OF MODERN DIABOLISM
We have finished with the witnesses of Lucifer, and I think that the
search-light of a drastic criticism has left them in considerable
disarray. We approach the limit of the present inquiry, but before
summing up and presenting such a general statement or conclusion as may
be warranted by the facts, there is one point, left over hereunto, and
designed for final consideration, because it appeals more exclusively to
professed transcendentalists, which it will be necessary to treat
briefly. I have already indicated that sporadic revivals of black magic
have occasionally been heard of by mystics here in England, and from
time to time we have also heard vaguely of obscure assemblies of
Luciferians. Quite recently an interview with Papus, the French
occultist, published in _Light_, mentions a society which was devoted to
the cultus of Lucifer, star of the morning, quite distinct from Masonry,
quite unimportant, and since very naturally dead. Now, a large
proportion of mystics here in England are High-Grade Masons, and if a
society of the Palladium had extended to anything remotely approaching
the proportions alleged, they could not have failed to know of it. I
will go further and affirm that our non-Masonic transcendental
associations have abundant opportunities to become acquainted with
institutions similar to their own, and it is preposterous to suppose
that there could be several Palladian triangles working their degrees in
this country without our being aware of the fact. But we have not been
aware of it, and our only informations concerning Palladism have come to
us from France. We do not accept these informations; we know that the
persons here in England who are alleged by French false witnesses to be
connected with the Palladium are not so connected, and are now learning
of it for the first time. The statements concerning Mr John Yarker are
categorically untrue; the gross calumny published by the "converted"
Diana Vaughan about Dr Wynn Westcott, who happens to be a High-Grade
Mason, she will never dare to come forth from her "retreat" and
re-affirm within the jurisdiction of these islands, because she knows
well that a British jury would make a large demand upon her reputed
American dollars. Let us, however, put aside for the moment the
mendacities and forgeries which complicate the question of Lucifer, and
let us approach Palladism from an altogether different side. I believe
that I may speak with a certain accent of authority upon any question
which connects with the French magus Éliphas Lévi. I am an old student
of his works, and of the aspects of occult science and magical history
which arise out of them; in the year 1886 I published a digest of his
writings which has been the only attempt to present them to English
readers until the present year when I have undertaken a translation _in
extenso_ of the _Dogme et Rituel de la Haute Magie_, which is actually
in the hands of the printer. Now, it has not been alleged in so many
words that the radix of Modern Diabolism and the Masonic cultus of
Lucifer is to be found in Éliphas Lévi, but that is the substance of the
charge. Most, or all, of the witnesses agree in representing him as an
atrocious Satanist, an invoker of Lucifer, a celebrater of black masses,
and an adept in the practical blasphemies of Eucharistic sacrilege; all
of them father either upon the Palladium or upon Pike a variety of
documents containing gross thefts from Lévi; some of them, directly and
upon their own responsibility, cite passages from his works, always with
conspicuous bad faith. Finally, they agree in connecting him with the
foundation of the New and Reformed Palladium through his alleged
disciple Phileas Walder; and one of them goes so far as to say that
Palladism was a further development or restoration of a Satanic society
directed by Éliphas Lévi and operating his theurgic system, which he in
turn, if I rightly understand the mixed hypothesis of M. de la Rive, may
have derived from the Palladic rite of 1730. If we accept for the
moment this origin of the reformed order, it will follow that if the
occult doctrines of Éliphas Lévi have been seriously misunderstood or
grossly defamed by the witnesses, the diabolical or Luciferian
connection of Palladism does not wear the complexion which has been
ascribed to it. It is represented as: (a) outwardly Masonic, and (b)
actually theurgic. (c) It is Manichæan in doctrine. (d) It regards
Lucifer as an eternal principle co-existent, but in a hostile sense,
with Adonaï. (e) It holds that the beneficent deity is Lucifer, while
Adonaï is malevolent; (f) Certain sections of Palladists, however,
recognise that Lucifer is identical with Satan, and is the evil
principle. (g) This section adores the evil principle as such. Now, in
each and all these matters the Palladian system conflicts with that of
Lévi.
To give a colourable aspect to their hypothesis, the witnesses affirm
that Lévi was a high-grade Mason. He was nothing of the kind; he affirms
most distinctly in his "History of Magic," that for any knowledge which
he possessed about the mysteries of the fraternity, he owed his
initiation only to God and to his individual studies. Secondly, the
practice of ceremonial magic, which is what the witnesses understand by
theurgy, is a practice condemned by Lévi, except as an isolated
experiment to fortify intellectual conviction as to the truth of magical
theorems. He attempted it for this purpose in the spring of the year
1854, and having satisfied himself as to the fact, he did not renew it.
Thirdly, the philosophy of Éliphas Lévi is in direct contrast to
Manichæan doctrine; it cannot be explained by dualism, but must be
explained by its opposite, namely, triplicity in unity. He shows that
"the unintelligent disciples of Zoroaster have divided the duad without
referring it to unity, thus separating the pillars of the temple, and
seeking to halve God" (_Dogme_, p. 129, 2nd edition). Is that a
Manichæan doctrine? Again: "If you conceive the Absolute as two, you
must immediately conceive it as three to recover the unity principle"
(_Ibid._). Once more: "Divinity, one in its essence, has two fundamental
conditions of being--necessity and liberty" (_Ibid._, p. 127). And yet
again: "If God were one only, He would never be Creator nor Father. If
He were two, there would be antagonism or division in the infinite, and
this would be severance or death for every possible existence; He is
therefore three for the creation by Himself, and in His image of the
infinite multitude of beings and numbers. Thus He is really one in
Himself and triple in our conception, by which we also behold Him triple
in Himself and one in our intelligence and in our love. This is a
mystery for the faithful and a logical necessity for the initiate of the
absolute and true sciences" (_Ibid._, p. 138). And the witnesses of
Lucifer have the effrontery to represent Lévi as a dualist! I will not
discredit their understanding by supposing that they could misread so
plain a principle, nor dissemble my full conviction that they acted with
intentional bad faith. Fourthly, Éliphas Lévi regarded Lucifer as a
conception of transcendental mythology, and the devil as an impossible
fiction, or an inverted and blasphemous conception of God--divinity _à
rebours_. He describes the Ophite heresy which offered adoration to the
serpent and the Caïnite heresy which justified the revolt of the first
angel and the first murderer as errors fit for classification with the
monstrous idols of the anarchic symbolism of India (_Rituel_, pp. 13,
14). Is that diabolism? Is that the cultus of Lucifer? True, Lévi did
not believe in the personal existence of a father of lies, and if it be
Satanism not to do so, let us be content to diabolise with Lévi while
the false witnesses illustrate the methods of their father.
It is unnecessary to multiply quotations, but here is one more: "The
author of this book is a Christian like you; his faith is that of a
Catholic deeply and strongly convinced; therefore his mission is not to
deny dogmas, but to combat impiety under one of its most dangerous
forms, that of erroneous belief and superstition.... Away with the idol
which hides our Saviour! Down with the tyrant of falsehood! Down with
the black god of the Manichæans! Down with the Ahriman of the old
idolaters! Live God alone and His incarnate Logos, Jesus the Christ,
Saviour of the world, who beheld Satan precipitated from heaven!" Go to,
M. le Docteur Bataille! _À bas_, Signor Margiotta! Phi, diabolus and Leo
Taxil!
Seeing then that Éliphas Lévi has been calumniously represented, and
that he was not a Satanist, he could not have founded a Satanic society,
nor could a Manichæan order have been developed out of his doctrines.
Hence if a Palladian Society do exist at Charleston, it either owes
nothing to Lévi, or its cultus has been falsely described. In other
words, from whatever point we approach the witnesses of Lucifer, they
are subjected to a rough unveiling. In the words of the motto on my
title, the first in this plot was Lucifer--_videlicet_, the Father of
Lies!