FREEMESONRY.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XI, Issue 7, 8 June 1883, Page 19

FREEMESONRY.

The following able letter has been addre«sed by its writer to a gentleman in Cbristchurch. who has kindly placed it at onr disposal : — Dear Sir,— Wh^n you asked me the other day to give you an abstract of the argument against Freemasonry which I had litid before the Literary Society* it was, as I understood, with a view rather to a warning against joining the Order, than a mode of reasoning with anyone already a Mason. And before com plying with your request I must affirm that in this I cordially agree. Arguments are absolutely useless with Masons : once a man has been initiated all possibility of convincing him by reason and logic vanishes ; time would simply be wasted in attempting it ; and still more is this the case in proportion as he rises in the Order and advances in its degrees. At first sight, what I have just said might, perhaps, be interpreted in two ways, neither of which would be the right one. It might be paid, first, that I affirm all Masons to be devoid of the reasoning faculty, impervious in themselves to logic. It is not so : nor would I dream of anything so absurd. Or, on the other hand, my statement may be thought to mean that Masonry is so excellent and so irrefragable that the moment its principles are known they carry with them absolute conviction, and that no one outside the Order could possibly show any decent reason against it. Nothing could be farther from my thoughts, certain 'y : were it so, indeed, my business would be rather to induce as many people ns possible to join the Masonic Order than to dissuade them from it. My meaning is simply this : that a Maton, by the very essence of his membership, even if not prevented by direct prohibition from the Order, is precluded from arguing upon its principles. I believe that lam correct in stating that, as a matter of fact, Masons are strictly and absolutely forbidden to discuss Masonry with outsiders ; forbidden lo persuade anybody to join the Order ; forbidden to answer arguments brought against them ; forbidden, if by chance they hear Masonry discussed, to join in the discussion unless those present are Masons. This I believe ; but even supposing it to he untrue, the fact would still remain that a non-Mason must, of absolute necessity, find him* self more than hainpured, absolutely fettered, if he tries to areue with a Mason. The mere fact that Masonry is a secret society, biding its principles under a veil and binding its members by a secret oath, would render it impossible ever to argue on it with a Mason, because there would be always some point of his knowledge and of his principles which one could not get at. This point is of extreme importance, and I am led to dwell thus particularly on it because, as you know, men who have at some time or other been Masons, but who now, as Catholics, have left the Order, do rot sympathise with the views which you and I hold about it and still profess reverence for Masonry though they bow to the commands of the Church. And this must of necessity be, as I conceive : nor is it, in them, blameworthy. For these men, although leaving Masonry, are not th*reby released from the obligations of their oath, except in so far as their direct connection with the Order is concerned. They have sworn, with full consciousness of what they were doing, never to divulge the secrets of Masonry. The Church, in commanding them to leave the Order, has not, and cannot have, released them from the vow of secrecy. Consequently, except by incurring the guilt of perjury, they cannot, even now, discuss the principles of Masonry, nor can they seek, as Catholic 0 , to dissuade anybody from joining the Order, because they cannot approach the question of its principles. And. as you and I know from experience, all that they can do is to mildly protest. " Oh. if you only knew what Masonry is you would not attack it so strongly," or, '• Well, as a Catholic, I have left Masonry, but for all that I vould not go so far as you do in condemning it, beyond the question of its being a secret society." and so on. What can one say against this ? There is nothing tangible to get hold of. Ask them to go a step further and explain the points upon which they still admire Masonic principles, and they are at once, of necessity, tongue-tied. If this, then, be the case with men no longer masons ; if severance from the Order cannot carry with it release from its vows of secrecy ; if even a Catholic who has been a Mason cannot, be he ever bo willing, dissuade a brother Catholic from becoming a Mason (except, of course, in the vaguest way), how much more difficult.must it be, how absolutely impossible, to discuss, in any satisfactory manner, Masonry with a man still a member of the Masonic Order ? So I come back to the point whence I started, and proceed on the understanding that what you want is, not to persuade anybody to leave Masonry, but to dissuade somebody of your acquaintance from entering it. One portion of the ground remains yet to be cleared before I can give you the argument which you ask for. It is this. I must take it for g' anted that your friend is one who, in matters of this kind which affect the soul and the intellect of man, is willing to be bound by the principles of reason and logia in the strict sense. What I mean is that he recognises the difference between taking action upon conclusions after argument in matters spiritual and in matters temporal. The point is of importance, as you will see. In affairs of this life, in questions of politics, of money, of any sort of business or pleasure, nay, also of bodily comfort, convenience, or health, in any possible question of temporal matters, it may be, and, indeed, often 18, advisable to accept of a compromise and not to be bound by the . ultimate conclusions drawn from even the very best premisses. From *X.the highest to the lowest this rule obtains. Probably the English Constitution, the finest piece of human mechanism ever seen, is the greatest example of it : were strict logic to be adhered to, the whole fabric of British power would fall to pieces rapidly. In business, in pleasure, men always act on compromise, and very often accept of a wrong conclusion rather than submit to the inconvenience of a right one. But in matters spiritual, in philosophy, religion, anything affecting the soul, no compromise is possible or allowable ; no question of convenience may arise ; a premiss leading to a false conclusion must be absolutely wrong, and a conclusion found to be ulti-

mately right must be accepted and submitted to. It has always seemed to me to be one of the most astounding absurdities of that excessively absurd institution, the Anglican Church, that it pro* feesedly accepts and boasts of a system of compromise in spiritual concerns. It may, perhaps, be from one of these compromises that the Church of England allies itself so closely and eagerly with Masonry. To us Catholics, of course, there is no via media ; it will not do for us to say " such and such a conclusion commends itself to my mind as being strictly logicel and absolutely true, bnt the other suits me best at present, and just now logic must give way to convenience. Masonry is undoubtedly a bad thing, but I should like to join it just to see what it is like from the inside." Putting, therefore, aside everything but the very strictest adherence to dry, hard, syllogistic reasoning, I shall proceed to my argument on the understanding that your friend, if he can find no flaw in the sequence of it, is prepared to accept the conclusion as the guide of his action. Of course, if the reasoning be defective, I am open to conviction on the other side : only it must be shown to be so, quite apart from any mere personal predilections or questions of convenience. The Masonic Order is, admittedly, a secret society, that is there is in connection with it something which is not known, or to be known, by out-id ers. Consequently, this secret thing may be of one of the following two kinds :—: — 1. It may be only something in the external arrangements of Masonry, that is, something in tne mere ceremonial, designed only to puzzle or deceive non-Masons. 2. It may b > something connected with the internal prirciples of Masonry, that is, something of deep import, essential to the whole fabric. I disca dat once the first of these alternative 1 ). For, not only is it admittedly contrary to the fact, not only would neither Masons nor their adversaries admit it, but it would be of course more than even the most foolish aspirant could stand. It would reduce Masonry to a kind of nut with elaborately protected shell and absolutely devoid of kernel, a thing which would be the derision of eveo its own original admirers. I proceed, therefore, on the second ground — that the secret is one of principle essential to Masonry. I shall neglect the consideration of the point that, whatever the secret may be, it is only gradually made known to members as they rise in the Order, the newly-initiated knowing very little of it, and very few being thoroughly acquainted with. This point might lead to interesting considerations, but is foreign to my present purpose. Now, this secret of Masonry must absolutely, as I conceive, be one of the four following kinds :— 1. It may be a secret, the publication of which would be indifferent ; that is, would do neither good nor harm t o anybody. 2. It may be a secret, the publication of which would be of advantage to some and injurious to others. 3. It may be a secret, the publication of which would be of advantage to all mankind. 4. It may be a secret, the publication of which would be injurious to all mankind. I know of no other alternative than these. I take them seriatim :—: — 1. If the secret of Masonry is an indifferent one ; if nobody on the face of the earth would be one penny the worae or one penny the better for its publication ; if, in point of fact, it is nothing better than a " fraud " (a 9 Mark Twain would say), the natural and only consequence must be that the whole system of Masonry is but a piece of childish imbecility. Putting aside all higher considerations, and taking merely an ordinary common-sense view of the matter, could any sane man in his sober senses conceive a more ridiculous piece of folly than a whole system, of immense complexity, built up in elaborate gradations of mystery and dignity, and all for the purpose of preserving, in inviolate secrecy something which might and could be made known to all the world without the slightest influence either for good or evil 1 Would any Mason be such an ass as to devote a great deal of his time, and spend a great deal of his money in initiation, in promotion to the Masters' Degree, in Royal Arch Chapters, Preceptories of Knights Templar, Scotch Rites, Grand Oiients, and so on, with complicated oaths and grips and passwords, lodges tiled in deepest mystery, hocus-pocus of all sorts and descriptions, merely to preserve and guard jealously a secret of not the slightest importance whatever ? Yet this is distinctly and strictly the consequence, if this first alternative of mine were the true one. One explanation only could be made — namely, that really nobody in Masonry, except those few in the very highest and most mysterious circle of all, can tell what a " fraud " the secret is ; all below that circle do not know what the secret itself is. And on this supposition the very highest Masons would simply retain their position because they would be too muGh ashamed to confess what fools they were. I offer no opinion of my own on this explanation, which has, nevertheless, a good deal of probability about it. What I want your friend to understand is that, on the first alternative, Masonry is reduced to such absolute quintessence of folly as to be unworthy of the thoughts of a sane man. 2. The publication of the secret might be advantageous to some and injurious to others. This may be at once discarded es being a contradiction in itself, inasmuch as, in philosophy and all matters connected with higher than temporal questions, there cannot be any such thing as a medicament which may cure some constitutions and poison others. Moreover, the idea of such a secret as this, the nature of which could not, by any possibility, be known till after initiation, is absurd. Even in temporal matters, no doctor would dream of administering to a patient of whose constitution he was quite ignerant one of these drugs just alluded to. But a Grand Master in Alasonry, admitting a candidate to initiation, could not have the least notion what the effect on him of the " secret," when made known, might be. And I hare merely mentioned this alternative because yomr friend might, possibly, be one of those who say : " Well, it won't do me any barm, whatever it may have done to others."

3. The secret may be one, the publication of which would be of I advantage to all mankind. Here, I admit, is something which may be, and perhaps has been, the means of inducing many to join the ) Masonic Order. Many have doubtless had in their minds a vague I notion that Masonry embodies some very grand and magnificent truths, throws some brilliant light on the vexed questions of philosophy, teaches all that is sublime and glorious, inculcates and enforces the finest principles of virtue and excellence, and will gradually lead them on from darkness to light till their souls are bathed in the full splendour of the mo^t exalted wisdom. Many more, perhaps, aie caught with the phrases of universal benevolence, of noble fraternity, of grand, large-hearted charity and humanity, which they see in the published speeches of Masons, and they fancy that when once initiated into the secret of all these things they will have attained, as it were, a higher order of being. But what is the real, direct consequence of this third alternative ? It is that we have passed out of the region of imbecility into the region of evil. It means that Masons have one face for the world and another for themselves. It means that, preaching outwardly the grandeur of their principles, the benevolence of their intentions, they belie their professions by the very fact of their keeping those principles a secret. It means, in simple, plain terms, that Masonry is an enormous organisation of the vilest hypocrisy. Possessors of a secret which, as they avow, embodies the highest and most perfect truths, a secret which would tend, if made known, to the general improvement of the human race, Masons basely and selfishly keep it in their own jealous hands and refuse it to the world. If this third alternative were the truth, the plain question might ba put to the Masonic Order — " Why do you not divulge this excellent, this wonder-working secret ? " and the questioagyould be unanswerable. •w The secret may be one, the publication 'of which would be injurious to all mankind. There is no need for me to dwell on this, which .points to its own conclusion. Your friend can doubtless picture to his own mind what must be the nature of that organisation which knowingly, of malice prepense, employs all its forces, multiplies all its precautions, invents all manner of intricate combinations, to preserve and guard so frightful a secret. Ido not speak now of the newly-initiated candidates who, of course, could not previously know what they would have to do. But it mar be taken for granted that one part of the neophyte's oath must be that he will not in any way injure Masonry or its secret. And as he rises in the Order, and as he becomes more aDd more intimately acquainted with its principles, so he becomes more and more bound to protect it, to foster it, to help it. And so, if this fourth alternative be true, it results as a direct consequence that in joining Masonry one would join an Association of the most evil description possible, and that the more one rose in the degrees the more awfully evil one would become. You will observe that I have abstained from expressing my own opinion as to which of the above alternatives may be the true one. Nor do I now propose to decide. But, summing up my argument, I find that :— 1. The secret of Masonry is one, not merely of external cere- I monial, but of essential principle. 2. It must be of one of three kinds (I have discarded the second of the alternatives given above). (a.) If it is indifferent, embodying neither good nor harm, r-then-Masonry is beneath contempt, a monument of the most childish imbecility. (b.) If it is a good secret, calculated to do good to mankind, then Masonry is a living lie, a thoroughly organised hypocrisy, a lie in the face of heaven and earth ; and Masons, the more they rise in it, become all the baser and more flagrant hypocrites. (c.) If it is a bad secret, calculated to do harm to mankind, then Masonry adds to hypocrisy the guilt of premeditated and systematic teaching and practice of evil, and becomes something almost too vile for expression. My business has been to put this question before you in its shortest and simplest way, and I have purposely refrained from complicating it by side-issues or comments of my own. I have assumed all through that your friend desires earnestly to be guided by strict adherence to reason, and to put aside personal feeling ; and having brought him now to definite conclusions I leave him to make his choice. Take it any way you like, Masonry is either ridiculous or bad. At its very best it is unworthy of the aspirations of a reasonable man ; at its worst it should be beneath even a thought from a good man. And anybody joining it with his eyes open mnst be prepared to choose under which character ho adopts it. Only one word more. You observe that my argument has been confined purely to abstract logic ; and I have assumed that your friend is open to conviction in that direction. I propose to consider some one of the^e days, and to lay before the Literary Society some speculations, why men (curiosity apart) do join the Masonic Order, and whyj having joined it, they remain members of it. As for mere. curiosity hunters, I take no note of them.— l am, etc., W. M. Maskell. May 11, 1883.