Part
1 – Hanoverians, Jacobites, Protestants, and Catholics
The
Morgan Affair proved to be the great catalyst for the anti-Masonic
movement in the United States. It was a tipping point which sparked
years of animosity that could have brought the fraternity down, but
it was not, as some think, the first shot across Masonry's bow. Even
before the inception of the first Grand Lodge, anti-Masonic seeds
began to sprout in Europe. These had their origins mainly within
organized religious bodies which saw Freemasonry as a negative
influence, if not a threat. The church was intensely opposed to
Freemasonry's support of secular ideals, raising concerns of
potential subversion. It was also suspicious of the fraternity's
secretive practices and oaths which it viewed as heresy. Finally, the
church saw the growing presence of Freemasonry within influential
circles as a challenge to its power.
The
first known criticism was launched at Freemasonry as – for lack of
a better term – a labor union. In 1383, John Wycliffe, known for
translating the Bible into English, said of the Masons,
"that
they conspire together that no man of their craft shall take less on
a day than they fix, that none of them shall do steady work which
might interfere with the earning of other men of the craft, that none
of them shall do anything but cut stone, though he might profit his
master twenty pounds by one day's work laying a wall without harm to
himself."i
That
is to say, Freemasons would not work for less than their stated wage
rate, nor would they do work which infringed on the skills and
ability of other craftsmen to earn their wages.
As
the Freemasons transitioned from operative to speculative, things
became more heated. The craft shook the foundations of religion
which, at the time, is to say it shook the Catholic church.
Freemasonry, through its Charges,
espoused tenets that were foreign to the teachings of the church.
Chief among these was its acceptance of all religions. The very first
section of Reverend James Anderson's Constitutions of 1723 makes it
clear:
"...if
[a Mason] rightly understands the Art, he will never be a stupid
Atheist nor an irreligious Libertine. But though in ancient Times
Masons were charg'd in every Country to be of the Religion of that
Country or Nation, whatever it was, yet 'tis now thought more
expedient only to oblige them to that Religion in which all Men
agree, leaving their particular Opinions to themselves; that is, to
be good Men and true, or Men of Honour and Honesty, by whatever
Denominations or Persuasions they may be distinguish'd; whereby
Masonry becomes the Center of Union, and the Means of conciliating
true Friendship among Persons that must have remain'd at a perpetual
Distance."
It
did not help that the Masons were known to discuss radical
Enlightenment-based concepts in their meetings such as the
blasphemous ideas of Copernicus and Galileo that the earth orbited
the sun – a notion that was a complete anathema to all that was
good and holy.
In
1685, prior to the formation of the Grand Lodge of England, King
James IIii,
a Catholic, assumed the throne. At the time, considerable friction
was brewing between Catholics and protestants in the country. Adding
to the tension, James was a cousin of Louis XIV, King of France, and
many in England were becoming increasingly wary of that relationship.
On
top of the animosities building up over religion and his ties to
France, James picked a fight with Parliament, eventually dissolving
it in an attempt to form a new body that would support him
unconditionally.iii
James' 26-year-old daughter Mary was a protestant, which was a
mitigating factor until 1688 when he had a son, James Francis Edward
Stuart (James III), whom he announced would be raised as a Catholic.
The birth of this son changed the line of succession, with many now
outraged over the prospect of a Catholic dynasty in England. Just as
many were certain the queen's pregnancy had been a hoax (a mystery
that was never settled).iv
Talk
of revolution was in the air. In 1688, a group of James'
former
supporters led by John Churchill (1650 –1722, 1st Duke of
Marlborough) wrote to the Dutch Prince William of Orange, pledging
their support if he would invade England. William, who also happened
to be the husband of James II's daughter Mary, did just that. After a
few skirmishes, James ran off to his cousin in France with baby James
III in his arms.v
With
that, William and Mary became rulers of England. A political
movement, the Jacobitesvi,
arose supporting the restoration of James to the throne.
A
quarter century later, George I became King.vii
He was a member of the House of Hanover which had ruled in Germany
beginning in the early part of the 17th
century. So Hanoverians were now in charge in England and strongly
opposed to the Jacobites.
The
Jacobites saw Freemasonry as an important means to achieving their
singular goal… restoring James or his Catholic Stuart successors to
the throne.viii
Their lodges were primarily Catholic. Hanoverian Lodges in England
were mainly protestant but also admitted Catholics and atheists, as
long as they adhered to the Hanoverian point of view.
Thinking
the Hanoverians were infringing on Jacobite Freemasonry, the now
grown up James Francis Edward Stuart, a good Catholic still living in
France, approached Pope Clement, asking him to ban Hanoverian
Freemasonry. James III thought since the Jacobian lodges were mainly
Catholic, the Pope would go along with his request without also
condemning the Jacobian brand of Freemasonry. The Pope didn't see it
that way.
The
Chief Minister of Louis XV of France, Cardinal André-Hercule de
Fleury, who had been investigating Freemasonry as a part of the
Inquisition, wanted all of Freemasonry banned.ix
Clement, suspecting the King felt the same way and not wanting to
cross the monarch, listened to de Fleury and in 1738, issued the
first Papal Bull condemning the fraternity, In
eminenti apostolatus specula:
"Now
it has come to Our ears, and common gossip has made clear, that
certain Societies… called in the popular tongue Liberi
Muratori
or Francs
Massons…
are spreading far and wide and daily growing in strength; and men of
any Religion or sect, satisfied with the appearance of natural
probity, are joined together, according to their laws and the
statutes laid down for them, by a strict and unbreakable bond which
obliges them, both by an oath upon the Holy Bible and by a host of
grievous punishment, to an inviolable silence about all that they do
in secret together… Thus these aforesaid Societies or Conventicles
have caused in the minds of the faithful the greatest suspicion, and
all prudent and upright men have passed the same judgment on them as
being depraved and perverted. For if they were not doing evil they
would not have so great a hatred of the light… We therefore… do
hereby determine and have decreed that these same Societies… of
Liberi
Muratori
or Francs
Massons…
are to be condemned and prohibited, and by Our present Constitution,
valid forever, We do condemn and prohibit them.
Moreover,
We desire and command that both Bishops and prelates, and other local
ordinaries, as well as inquisitors for heresy, shall investigate and
proceed against transgressors… and they are to pursue and punish
them with condign penalties as being most suspect of heresy."
The
Pope also notes in his encyclical, the first of many having since
been issued against Freemasons, that "several countries"
had already outlawed and eliminated Freemasonry.
In
a way, one could argue it was not the Catholic church that struck
this seminal blow to Freemasonry, rather it was differences between
two factions of the Craft that got them condemned. At any rate,
officially formed as a Grand Lodge in 1717, just two decades later
the Catholic church, along with several countries, had banned the
fraternity, leaving anti-Masonry as a stowaway on board as the Craft
sailed for the new world.
Part
2 – The Incident
By
the time Masonic lodges began to appear in what would become the
United States, the Catholic church was on the verge of banning the
Craft. Protestant evangelical churches, strict and unbending in their
belief systems, were following suit. In addition, some colonists
began to fear the secretive nature of Masonic lodges and their
perceived influence over political and economic affairs was
threatening the emerging nation. It was not lost on the populace that
the Masonic lodges themselves, whether Ancient or Modern, owed their
existence and allegiance to being sanctioned by lodges in England, a
country daily waning in popularity with the upstart colonists. This,
even though many, if not most, Freemasons went on to support the
colonies in the American Revolution.
With
other priorities to deal with in the fledgling colonies, anti-Masonry
was simmering on the back burner, but nowhere near a boil. In fact,
membership in the Craft was still seen as desirable, an honor, and
not something everyone could achieve. A notorious incident began to
change things.
Daniel
Reese was a young apprentice pharmacist working in 1737 at a
prominent apothecary in downtown Philadelphia. He was one of those
who thought membership in Freemasonry would enhance his career and
status in the community. With that, he told his boss, the respected
and well-known Dr. Evan Jones, of his desire to join the
organization. Dr. Jones also knew about the Freemasons, a group about
which he had some doubts. Seeing an opportunity for some mischief, he
told Reese he would arrange his admission to the order.
Jones
and a few of his friends, none of whom were Masons, planned an
elaborate mock "initiation" for the unsuspecting Reese. A
few nights later, in the back yard of Jones' home, the group
performed the ceremony. John Remington, a Philadelphia attorney,
administered an "irreligious and scandalous" oath on the
naive Reese, after which he was subjected to "absurd and
ridiculous indignities," given a series of "ludicrous"
signs, and then congratulated on having received the first degree of
Freemasonry.
On
a subsequent night, June 13, 1737, Reese presented himself at Dr.
Jones' store to receive a "higher degree." The men
blindfolded him and escorted him to the cellar. There, the
perpetrators forced him to repeat an invocation to Satan, and coerced
him into drinking a strong drug, most likely a laxative, "for
sport."
The
group then lit a pan of brandy and camphor and removed Reese's
blindfold. At that, one of the sinister bunch confronted him wearing
a cowhide cloak and horns, so Reese would assume he was the devil.
The stunt failed to frighten Reese, so Jones threw the flaming liquid
onto Reese,x
severely burning him. Three days later, Reese died.xi
Remarkably,
a coroner's inquest acquitted the Masonic impostors, although it
severely condemned their actions. However, a grand jury subsequently
indicted Jones, Remington and John Tackerbury (an expelled Mason) for
murder. Jones and Remington were found guilty of manslaughter with
Tackerbury being acquitted. The court granted Remington a pardon due
to extenuating circumstances, including the need to provide for his
family. Jones' sentence, to have his hand branded,xii
was carried out immediately.
The
Masons came under fire, even though they had absolutely nothing to do
with the episode.
The Brothers from St. John's Lodge and the Grand Master published a
statement condemning the matter.
The
proceedings of the trial revealed Benjamin Franklin was aware of the
shenanigans. The Court of Common-Pleas had appointed him to settle
an affair in which Jones was involved. During one of their meetings
Jones told him about the first "initiation" and Franklin
admitted to laughing heartily "as my manner is." Having
heard about Franklin's reaction Andrew Bradford, Franklin's longtime
rival in the printing industry, used that information to attack
Franklin, as well as the Freemasons, in his newspaper, the American
Weekly Mercury.
Franklin
responded in his Pennsylvania
Gazette,
noting he stopped laughing when Jones told him of the incident with
the laxative, and the fact the group made Reese swear to Satan.
Bradford shot back with a rebuttal that proved to be the opening
volley of what has been characterized as the first anti-Masonic
series of articles in a newspaper in colonial America.xiii
Part
3 – Revolution
Anti-Masonry
did not see a lot of growth during the era of the American
Revolution. Colonists were, after all, preoccupied with other things.
It is also a well-known fact that many Freemasons – George
Washington, Benjamin Franklin, John Hancock and a nearly endless list
of others – supported the cause. Not only that, the Revolution was
fought for liberty and equality, ideals that were consistent with
those of the fraternity. The perceived secrecy added to the mystique
of the order and most saw membership as a desirable enhancement to
one's status.
Still,
the same objections to the Craft that had always been there –
suspicion of its secrecy, objections by organized religion, the
perception of elitism, and rumors of conspiracies – continued to
plague the Masons.
A
few years after the American Revolution, the French Revolution came
along and with it a complex relationship with Freemasonry. A number
of factors including social inequality, financial problems due to the
monarchy's extravagance, taxes, and the King's weak leadership led to
public dissatisfaction culminating with the storming of the Bastille
on July 14, 1789.
The
Enlightenment, with its ideas about reason and individual rights
appealed to the populace and was also a factor leading to its
discontent. These same ideals promulgated by the Enlightenment, were
not at all inconsistent with progressive Masonic thinking, leading
many prominent Freemasons to support the revolution. Among
these were the Marquis de Lafayette (1757-1834), Georges Danton
(1759-1794), Jean Sylvain Bailly (1736-1793), Count Volney
(1757-1820), and Comte de Mirabeau (1749-1791).
The
end of the revolution became a tumultuous period now known as the
French Reign of Terror, characterized by extreme repression. The
Committee on Public Safety sprang up in order to deal with threats to
the revolution and the newly-formed republic. Although formed to
suppress counter-revolutionary forces and protect the revolution, the
Reign of Terror soon devolved into a violent force using accusations
of treason to settle personal conflicts.
Not
all Freemasons supported the revolution, but many of them supported
it initially until the violence of the Reign of Terror emerged. As
such some of those same Masons who were supporters of the revolution
were later declared its enemies. Danton and Bailly were both declared
traitors and guillotined when they became disenchanted with the
Committee's violent tactics. Mirabeau
and Lafayette changed their views but escaped the wrath of the Reign
of Terror. Pierre Samuel DuPont de Nemours (1739-1817), who also fell
into this group, escaped the guillotine only because the head of the
Reign of Terror, Maximilian Robespierre, was executed beforehand.xiv
Without
the existence of definitive data, it is probably safe to assume
Freemasons, more than not, supported both revolutions. In the case of
the French Revolution, it is probable Masonic support did not extend
to the Reign of Terror. In both cases anti-Masonry may have been
aligned with those in opposition to the revolutions or, later, part
of Robespierre's terrorism.
Part
4 – Post-Revolutionary Resurgence
Once
the American and French Revolutions were in the rear-view mirror,
anti-Masonry again began creeping out into the open. Strong voices,
including future president John Quincy Adams (1767-1848), John
Robinson (1739-1805), and Reverend Jedidiah Morse (1761-1826), came
on the scene to voice their opposition to the Freemasons.
In
1798, Robinson published a scathing 240 page diatribe with the
daunting title, Proofs
of a Conspiracy against all the Religions and Governments of Europe,
carried on in the secret meetings of Freemasons, Illuminati and
Reading Societies.
Morse picked up on the views expressed in Robinson's book, preaching
sermons against the Freemasons and Illuminati, claiming they had
incited the French Revolution. This prompted George Washington,
clarifying the separation between Freemasonry, the Illuminati, and
the still active Jacobites to respondxv:
It
was not my intention to doubt that, the Doctrines of the Illuminati,
and principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United States. On
the contrary, no one is more truly satisfied of this fact than I am.
The idea that I meant to convey, was, that I did not believe that the
Lodges of Free Masons in this Country had, as Societies, endeavored
to propagate the diabolical tenets of the first, or pernicious
principles of the latter (if they are susceptible of separation).
That Individuals of them may have done it, or that the founder, or
instrument employed to found, the Democratic Societies in the United
States, may have had these objects; and actually had a separation of
the People from their Government in view, is too evident to be
questioned.
Still,
a growing segment of the population continued to be wary of the
Freemasons.
The mystique of the Craft's secret nature gave way, for some, to
suspicions and rumors of brewing conspiracies, its gentry-based
membership drew accusations of elitism, and objections by organized
religion continued.
Within
the Catholic Church, anti-Masonry became more intense. In 1739,
Cardinal Firrao issued an edict imposing the death penalty for anyone
disobeying In
eminenti.xvi
In 1751, Pope Benedict XIV issued Providas
Romanorum Pontificum
which reaffirmed Clement's bull of 1738, condemning Freemasonry based
on its demand for oaths, secrecy, religious ecumenism, and its
perceived opposition to the Church and State. In 1821 Pope Pius VII
issued Ecclesiam
a Jesu Christo,
reinforcing opposition to Freemasonry based on its oath-bound
secrecy. Leo XII published Quo
graviora mala
in 1825 condemning Freemasonry as a secret oath-binding society.
The
Catholic church has issued many condemnations of Freemasonry since
that time. However, after Quo
graviora mala
in 1825 little additional condemnation was necessary to change public
opinion about the Craft. The following year, a man named William
Morgan came on the scene and superseded anything the church could
have done to turn the tide against the Masons.
Morgan's
threats to reveal Masonic secrets and the Freemasons' ill-advised
response garnered an anti-Masonic wave that swept the country, led to
the formation of the anti-Masonic political party, forced the closing
of many lodges, prompted many men to leave and disavow Freemasonry,
and changed American history.
iThe
Canadian Forum, a Monthly Journal of Literature and Public Affairs,
Volume IV, No. 37, October, 1923, p. 284
iiJames
II (October 14, 1633 – September 16, 1701) ruled England and
Ireland as James II and Scotland as James VII from February 6, 1685
to December 23, 1688, with historians sometimes referring to him as
King James II & VII.
iiiThis
never happened. Once James II dissolved Parliament, it never met
again during his tenure as king.
ivChurchill,
Winston, A History of the English Speaking Peoples, The New
World, Dodd, Mead & Company, 1966, pp.404-405.
vIbid,
pp. 396-410. The English have called this relatively bloodless coup
the "Glorious Revolution." Its alternate names have been
"The Bloodless Revolution," and "The Revolution of
1688."
viThe
name derives from the Latinized version of James, or Jacobus.
viiWilliam
and Mary jointly ruled until her untimely death from smallpox in
1694. At William's death in 1702, Anne, the younger daughter of
James II, took over. Anne died in 1714, when George I assumed the
throne.
viiiIrish
Jacobitism and Freemasonry, Sean J Murphy, Eighteenth-Century
Ireland, vol 9, 1994, pp 75-82, https://tinyurl.com/Jacobism
ixBernheim,
Alain (2011). Ramsay et ses deux discours (in French). Paris:
videographer, broadcaster, television producer. pp. 17–19. ISBN
9782906031746.
xSome
reports claimed Jones tripped, spilling the liquid.
xiPennsylvania
Gazette, No. 444, June 9 to 16, 1737
xiiHand
branding was a common punishment in the US through the early years
of the 19th century. Most likely the letter "M,"
for "Murderer," was branded on Jones hand, an extremely
painful and excruciating ordeal which Jones would carry for the rest
of his life informing everyone he came into contact with of his
crime.
xiiihttps://www.alrny.org/articles/power-of-the-press-the-bradford-amp-freemason-rivalry-in-provincial-america
xivDenslow,
William, 10.000 Famous Freemasons, Volume IV Q-Z and supplement,
Transactions of the Missouri Lodge of Research, Volume No. 17, 1960,
© 1961, William R. Denslow, pp. 388-389
xvGeorge
Washington to Washington, D.C., Commissioners, October 27, 1798
https://www.loc.gov/resource/mgw2.021/?sp=201
xviMany
arrests were made in Florence, but no death sentences were known to
be carried out.
