Monday, September 22, 2008

Masonic Harmony? Has It Ever Existed?

























Our Fraternity was founded out of disharmony.
Disharmony created by Kings, Clergy and Potentates of all time.
Inflamed by Edicts and Inquisitions sent out by men, believing they were superior to the commoners, and fervently defended to keep their seats of control and power.
The first hundred years of our Fraternities existence was in disharmony, but the Spirit of Freemasonry continued to grow while Dukes and Lords quarreled over who controlled Freemasonry and it constituents. Here is a little history of Freemasonry during its infancy compiled by Brother Rebold, M.D. from 1860.
Harmony is mentioned by the Senior Warden in regards to the pay to the craft. The idea is equal pay will create harmony, or just rewards for labor procured, in conjunction with the quality of the work. Merit and Equality was what created Harmony, not everyone getting along and everyone avoiding the discussions of politics and religion.
Harmony can be created by the equaling out of opposite forces/opinions, not all conforming and being loyal subjects!
Dukes and Lords and Potentates created the UGLE for control purposes only. Not Harmony amongst the Craft. That will come from equality, not creating Titles of Prince of East and West or Illustrious Potentates. A fraternity professing equality then creates “Higher Degrees” with fancy little Titles, so a commoner can achieve the Title of Prince, Or King, or Potentate. The Fraternity of Nobility that Freemasonry fought, had infiltrated the order, and created Titles for the Commoners to chase, to feel equal to a Duke or some other nobility (Shriners are called Nobles). The Jesuits, Stuarts and Hanovers used Freemasonry as a battle ground for power and control.
True Equality, True Liberty and True Fraternity will equal Harmony.
Equality amongst Grand Lodge’s and their members,
Liberty to Travel and meet with all Freemasons and Freedoms of Speech and Associations.
Fraternity of All Mankind as Equal Laborers of the Ultimate Lodge: Earth.

“The three Grand Lodges of Great Britain, thus constituted, propagated the new Freemasonry (Grand Lodge of London) upon every portion of the globe, so that in 1750, we find it extended into nearly every civilized country; but its humanitarian doctrines, like the dogma of “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity,” which it exhibited, frightened the kings and the clergy, who sought to arrest its progress by issuing decrees and edicts against it. In Russia, 1731, in Holland, in 1735, in Paris, 1737, 1738, 1744, and 1745, the meetings of lodges of Freemasons were interdicted by the government; while at Rome and in Florence its members were arrested and persecuted, and in Sweden, Hamburg, and Geneva they were prohibited from meeting or assembling themselves in the capacity of lodges. The Holy Inquisition threw Freemasons into prison, burnt; by the hand of the public executioner, all books which contained Masonic regulations, history, or doctrines; condemned at Malta to perpetual exile, in 1740, a number of knights who had organized a lodge on that island; in Portugal it exercised against them cruelties of various kinds, and condemned them to the galleys; while in Vienna and Marseilles, as also in Switzerland, and in the canton of Berne, the iron hand of that “Holy” institution was felt in 1743. In 1748, at Constantinople, the sultan endeavored to destroy the Masonic society. In the states of the Church, the King of Naples prohibited Masonry, and Ferdinand VII, King of Spain, issued an edict that prohibited the assembly of Freemasons within his kingdom, under penalty of death. In 1751, Pope Benedict XIV renewed the bull of excommunication promulgated against the Fraternity by Clement XII, while the threat of the death menaced all who should be known to attend Masonic meetings.

But all these exhibitions of the rage of kings, princes and potentates were ineffectual to stop the onward course of Freemasonry, which continued to be propagated upon all the surface of the earth with a rapidity that no power could arrest. Braving the bull of Benedict XIV, Freemasonry is openly practiced in Tuscany, at Naples, and in many other parts of the Italian peninsula. At Rome even the partisans of the Stuarts founded some lodges, which they took but feeble pains to hide from the authorities.

The activity of the Grand Lodges of Great Britain, and above all, of that of London, was not confined to the establishment of lodges in Europe between the years 1727 and 1740; they had already transplanted Masonry to Bengal, to Bombay, the Cape of Good Hope, New South Wales, New Zealand, and Java, and as early 1721, lodges of Masons were established in Canada. Before 1740 Masonry existed in the principal colonies of the now United States of America, such as Massachusetts, Georgia, South Carolina and New York. In those colonies the lodges had created Grand Lodges independent of the Grand Lodges of England, of whom they had in the beginning received their authority.

The Lodge of London, notwithstanding its astonishing prosperity, was not permitted to enjoy that prosperity without great internal struggles, caused first by the Grand Lodge of York, and subsequently by the schism of a great many brethren, who adhering to the claims of the latter, went out from the former and took the name of “Ancient Masons,” in contradistinction to the membership of the Grand Lodge of London, who remained true to their engagements, and whom this schismatic party styled “Modern Masons.” These schismatic lodges, composed in great part of Irish Masons- who accused the Grand Lodge of altering the rituals and introducing innovations- and of Masons who had been expelled, in 1751, constituted a rival power to the Grand Lodge, under the title of “The Grand Lodge of Ancient Masons of England.” Notwithstanding its inferiority, and a few lodges which it represented or was enabled to establish, this schismatic party, in 1772, requested the Duke of Athol, who had already filled that office in the Grand Lodge of Scotland, to become its Grand Master, a request with which he complied.

To give itself importance, and to influence to its ranks the nobility, this schismatic party added to the degrees with which it had started some of the high degrees created in France by the [artisans of the Stuarts, and which they imported into England about the year 1760, and combined them the symbolic degrees into a rite of seven degrees, the highest of which they called the Royal Arch. This Grand Lodge of self-styled Ancient Masons transplanted its rite into the lodges which it constituted in America, and there produced the same disorders and the same schisms among the fraternity that the “high” degrees had already provoked in all the sates of Europe.

This unhappy division in the bosom of English Masonry, commenced in 1736, was continued for a long time, by the Grand Lodges of Ireland and Scotland recognizing the schismatic “Grand Lodge of Ancient Masons,” to which they in this manner gave a character that it did not merit, but which continued until 1813, when at this time it ceased, by the schismatic Grand Lodge, which then had its Grand Master the Duke of Kent, and the Grand Lodge of London, styled by these schismatics “Modern Masons,” and which had as its Grand Master his brother, the Duke of Sussex, uniting under the title of the “United Grand Lodges of England.” In this union the ancient laws, as well as written as traditional, were taken as the basis, and the spirit that influenced the organization of 1717 was recognized, and it was then and there announced and proclaimed that the ancient and true Freemasonry was composed of but three degrees, viz: Apprentice, Fellow-craft, and Master Mason. Unhappily, however, the legitimate Grand Lodge conceded to the party self-styled “Ancient Masons,” who necessarily had to abandon their rite of seven degrees, a division of the degree of Master Mason practiced by this party, and taught as a supplementary portion of this degree, under the name of Royal Arch. This concession, which the schismatic party exacted as a sine qua non of their union with the legitimate Grand Lodge and surrender of their rights to that body, was an act of feebleness, on the part of the Grand Lodge of London, which has destroyed, in a great degree, the unity and the basis of true Masonry, as it had been practiced by that body, up to that time, with a laudable firmness.

In the connection of its moral effects and civilizing influence, English Freemasonry—we say it with sorrow--- has made but slight advances in the last half century; while, as we have seen, it was once the active pioneer everywhere. It exercised by its introduction into France an immense influence upon the principles of 1789, and started the development of liberal ideas throughout the whole of Europe; while in Oceanica, Hindostan and China its principles have modified the religious beliefs of the sectaries of Brahama, of the Persians and the Mussulmans, of whom are composed the majority of the lodges founded in those countries; yet to-day the Grand Lodge of England, like its sisters, those of Scotland and Ireland, seems satisfied to repose under its glories of the past and rest upon its laurels.”

Thanks Brother Rebold for this.....

Tuesday, September 02, 2008

Lodges During the Revolutionary War and Post War







Doing some reaearch the other day I came across American Union Lodge No 1. This Lodge has an interesting history. It is considered the first Ohio Lodge set up within the Northwest Territories, as it was called. General Rufus Putnam led a group of Revolutionary veterans to settle the land in 1788.

"These American Pioneers to the Northwest Territory arrived at the confluence of the Ohio and Muskingum rivers, on April 7, 1788, and established Marietta, Ohio as the first permanent American settlement in the Northwest Territory. Putnam went on to serve as a Supreme Court judge for the Northwest Territory. Brother Putnam established American Union Lodge No 1 in Marietta, but American Union Lodge did not start out in Ohio. Since this was a military Lodge, it was chartered in Boston Mass. in 1776 and by virtue of the warrant the brethren met on February 16th, an Entered Apprentice Lodge having been opened, proceeded to elect the following subordinate officers: John Parks, Senior Warden; Thos Chase, Junior Warden; Jonathan Heart, Secretary, and Samuel H. Parsons, Treasurer.



"And each accepted and took their seats with the usual ceremonies." Jacob Dickerson was appointed Tyler during the Lodge's pleasure and a committee of three named to prepare a "body of laws for the regulation of this particular Lodge." Four persons were proposed to be made Masons, three of whom were elected to receive the Entered Apprentice degree. On February 20, the organization was completed and the first Masonic work was done. The Lodge was opened in due form with the officers in their proper stations and eleven members and three visitors present. The Entered Apprentice degree was conferred and "the committee having made a report and the laws read, they were agreed to and ordered to be entered," and a Masonic body destined to experience every vicissitude of fortune in the Revolutionary Army and finally to light the torch of brotherly love and service anew in the great Northwest was launched on its career.

These were the times that tried men's souls. The Army was before Boston, which was held by 10,000 British troops, well equipped and well supplied, while their ships commanded the ocean....



"Gen. Washington was obliged to present a bold front but was unable to undertake any active movements or explain the reason for his inaction." At any moment they might be attacked by the enemy and none could tell what the final outcome was to be. Amid these conditions the American Union Lodge was born.



February 20 to April 2, 1776 meetings were held in Roxbury, Massachusetts. On March 28, Grand Master John Rowe was present.



In April, 1776, the Army, having moved to New York City, a meeting was held on April 23 At Bridgewater Hall. Eleven subsequent meetings were held between that date and August 15. The Battle of Long Island brought to an end the series of convocations. Two of the brethren were killed and nine others, including the Worshipful Master, Joel Clark, were captured.



February 15, 1779, Secretary Heart issued a call for a meeting at Reading, Connecticut, April 7. Joel Clark had died in prison, and Gen. Samuel H. Parsons was chosen as Worshipful Master.



A meeting was held at Nelson's Point, New York, June 24, 1779 at which Gen. George Washington was present. It was during this second sojourn in New York that Brother Rufus Putnam, afterwards leader of the pioneer settlement to Marietta, and eventually the first Grand Master of Ohio, was initiated, passed and raised. Brother Moses Cleaveland, who was one of the leaders of the Connecticut pioneers to northern Ohio, was made an Entered Apprentice.

During the Army's occupation of New Jersey in the winter of 1779-80 a few meetings were held in Morristown. The meeting of December 27, celebrating the festival of St. John the Evangelist, was the largest in numbers, thirty-three members and sixty-nine visitors, including General Washington.



No record of meetings in 1781, but meetings were held at different places in New York. The last meeting was held April 23, 1783.



From now on the meetings of the Lodge were very irregular and but little Masonic work was done.



The war was over and the soldiers returned to their homes to take up the duties of peace. The Lodge had come into existence while the conflict was in its infancy and had continued to its close. Her first Master had died a prisoner. Her second, General Samuel H. Parsons, had rendered distinguished service to his country, attained the rank of Major General and was a member of the military court which had tried Major Andre. Major Heart, the third Master, enlisted in time to take an honorable part in the battle of Bunker Hill and continued in the army until he met a soldier's death striving to rally Gen. St. Clair's troops in the West. The members came from Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Delaware and Virginia....



More than once disaster had brought the Lodge to the brink of destruction, but it had survived and, though the brethren knew it or not, in the providence of God it was destined to light the fires of Masonry in a land which they had not seen. An interval of seven years elapsed and when the Lodge again assembled, it was to find a permanent home on the banks of the Ohio.



The little band of pioneers who landed at Marietta on April 7, 1788, and those who come after them, contained members of American Union Lodge and others of the fraternity who were anxious to erect an altar of Masonry in the wilderness. Soon this came to pass and the wandering of the Lodge had ceased. Here it was to remain, a powerful influence for good in the settlement for generations yet to come. In the words of Brother Martin R. Andrews: "The year 1790 marks the beginning of a new era in the history of American Union Lodge." For five years it continued to be in reality a military Lodge, receiving and initiating recruits as they passed on their way to conflict. Yet the Lodge had found a permanent home. She stood at the portals of the great Northwest, and at the altar many a pioneer halted long enough to light a torch which he could bear far away into the wilderness. This, then. was the Golden Age of our history, not because it was free from trials and cares, for the whole period is full of struggles and perils. Rest is not the ideal of men who meet for the purpose of learning how to labor for the good of others. The period was truly golden in the opportunities it afforded the little group of brothers on the frontier to make their influence felt throughout a vast empire and into successive generations."...




Jonathan Heart, third and last Worshipful Master of American Union (Army) Lodge, was mustered out of military service in December, 1783. Two years later Brother Heart, as a captain in the army raised for the protection of the western frontier, brought the Warrant of American Union Lodge to the west.



In November, 1785, a detachment of troops under Ma jor and Brother John Doughty had been sent to the mouth of the Muskingum River and there erected Fort Harmar. Under the leadership of General Rufus Putnam the Ohio Company of Associates - New England veterans of the Revolution - landed at the mouth of the Muskingum, opposite Fort Harmar, April 7, 1788, and began the settlement of Marietta, the "Plymouth Rock of the West." Log cabins were built and a stockade, called Campus Martius, was erected as a refuge against the Indians. Such was the beginning of the first permanent settlement planted within the limits of the Northwest Territory.

On May 21, 1792, a letter was received from the Grand Secretary of the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania which read in part: "It was with equal surprise and pleasure the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania received intelligence of the formation of a Lodge in the midst of the immense wilderness of the West....As the account which you have given of the origin of your warrant is perfectly satisfactory and as the succession to the Chair has been uninterrupted, your authority for renewing your work appears to be incontestable." Thus were the Brethren assured of the right to carry on the work of the Craft in their new land.

On March 24, 1801, fire destroyed the Lodge hall and with it were lost its Warrant, furniture, jewels and implements. On November 7, 1803, Wor. Bro. Putnam reported that he had received a Charter from the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts, "renewing the rights, privileges and precedence of this Lodge as heretofore established."



The early Masonic home of American Union Lodge is an historic matter of special interest. From the date of establishment of the Lodge until 1794, the home of Major Sergeant at Campus Martius was used. Following this date, for several years the Lodge met a different places and in many records of the Secretary the place of meeting is not given. From January until August 1800, the Lodge had met at Campus Martius, but for the remainder of the year and the early part of 1801 the meetings were held at Bowen's Inn. After the fire of March 24th a new home was necessary and Lincoln's Inn was secured as a temporary movement where meetings were occasionally held. From December 5, 1803 until 1810 the office of Bro. Putnam was used as the meeting place.



Ohio became a state in 1803, and Chillicothe continued to be the capitol of Ohio until 1810. Prior to the year 1810, Masonic Lodges had been established at Marietta, Cincinnati, Warren, Worthington, Zanesville and Chillicothe. These Lodges were widely separated and travel between the settlements was chiefly on horseback. It was probably at the legislative sessions at Chillicothe that discussion relative to the formation of a Grand Lodge of Ohio first took place.



On January 7, 1808, the Brethren then in session took steps which led to the organization of the Grand Lodge of Ohio, F. & A. M., on which occasion a series of resolutions signifying conditions associated with membership were adopted. Bro. Rufus Putnam of American Union Lodge was chosen Grand Master and the first Grand Communication was to be held on the first Monday of the year 1809, "at whatsoever place the Legislature of Ohio shall then be in session."

At the 1810 session of Grand Lodge it was "Resolved, that the several Charters surrendered to this Grand Lodge by the Lodges under its jurisdiction be endorsed by the Grand Secretary, 'surrendered and canceled in due form, by order of the Grand Lodge,' and then returned to the respective Lodges to remain in the archives thereof for safe keeping; subject, however, to the order of the Grand Lodge at all times. "



Up until this time American Union Lodge No. 1 had maintained itself in an independent position as concerns proper and subordinate relationships with the Grand Lodge of Ohio. Regardless of this fact, Grand Lodge saw fit to reserve the number one position on its roster for American Union Lodge because of its age and military service during the Revolutionary War. A letter of invitation to identify itself with the Grand Lodge of Ohio was received from that body by American Union Lodge and read in open lodge in 1814. The following action was considered necessary: "On motion, it is Resolved, that it is pre-expedient to resign the present Warrant to the Grand Lodge of Ohio; or to any other Lodge; because that in so doing it will annihilate the Royal Arch Chapter working under said Warrant. Therefore this Lodge rejects any jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of Ohio over this Lodge."



This controversy between the Grand Lodge of Ohio and American Union Lodge continued for several years. The situation was finally brought to a head in 1823 when several worthy brethren who had previously broken away from the old Lodge petitioned the Grand Lodge of Ohio for the right to revive and organize the defunct American Union Lodge No. 1 under jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of Ohio. The Grand Lodge, after due investigation, granted the Charter, thus ending the long and unfortunate controversy between American Union Lodge and the Grand Body."


This is an interesting statement: "The situation was finally brought to a head in 1823 when several worthy brethren who had previously broken away from the old Lodge petitioned the Grand Lodge of Ohio for the right to revive and organize the defunct American Union Lodge No. 1 under jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of Ohio."

Why & when were there breakaway brethren from the American Union Lodge No 1?
What transpired between 1809 & 1823?
Why would not Putnam be behind this movement to "revive and organize" this "defunct Lodge? He was alive until 1824.

Here is another claim of meeting and operating in 1814: "A letter of invitation to identify itself with the Grand Lodge of Ohio was received from that body by American Union Lodge and read in open lodge in 1814."

In 1814, the Brethren apparently voted to not fall under the jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of Ohio?

In December of 1808, as the first Grand Master, Rufus Putnam, who was also the founder of Marietta, found it necessary to resign from the office of Grand Master because of advanced years and ill health. Brother Putnam served honorably as Master of American Union Lodge in 1794, 1798, and 1800. His death occurred in 1824, being 86 years of age, at which time he was, with the exception of Brother (General) Lafayette, the last surviving general officer of the Revolutionary Army.

Ill health in 1809, lived till 1824, American Union Lodge No 1 was Indepedant until 1823?
Were the breakaway brethren really worthy?
To take away the Independant status of an American Military Lodge that represented American Freemasonry and its Unilateral fight for Freedom and against oppression by the Crown............
America was about Independance.
American Freemasonry was unique in that is was a breeding ground for education and lessons in Liberty, Equality and Fraternity!

Brother and General Rufus Putnam and his revolutionary war veterans seemed to emody the Spirit of Freemasonry within American Freemasonry and the American Union Lodge No 1!

A Beacon of Universal Brotherhood on the edge of the Wilderness.
Two enemies during that time period. The Indians and The Crown's attempts at the reclaiming of America. He staid Vigilant till his death.

One question to leave all of you with: How would the Freemasonic, Revolutionary War Veteran feel about American Freemasonry's path during the years of 1800-1830?
Some of these Brothers had to militarily defend America again from Britian during the War of 1812?


Thanks to http://www.mariettamasonicbodies.com/au1history.htm for some of the Historical information.

Wednesday, August 27, 2008

EXERCISES IN BROTHERHOOD

















I have been working on what I call a Lodge project. I am currently working on what I would consider a program on "Exercises in Brotherhood" to bring before the Lodge for discussion, additions or subtractions, then an implementation of a program that would build our Brotherhood muscles. I played college football and other various recreational sports, and there were specific exercises for building any muscle in the body if one so desired. There are specific brain exercises to strengthen ones brain power. There are also meditative exercises, that once practiced, one becomes stronger/better at meditating/reflecting.

I firmly believe there are "exercises" that must build Brotherhood. I also believe that Dr Anderson and his cronies were concerned with building Brotherhood amongst all mankind. The Church and Crown had done such a wonderful job creating the Dark Ages and trying to perpetuate it into the future, that the common man had been ground down to dust. Too much guilt and degradation had destroyed any sense of a United Family/Brotherhood of Man and the concept that every human was special and beautiful, not evil. The early 1700's was the beginning of the movement of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. These tenets where what was going to heal Mankind. The founders of Organized Freemasonry I believe were trying to put down in a set of codes how to create Universal Brotherhood amongst Mankind, and remove the veil of superstition put in place by the Church and Crown. Man needed to be lifted up(raised) from being knocked down for centuries by our supposed annointed leaders.

Somewhere along the way, Freemasonry, at least in America, has lost its way from what Dr. Anderson and his cronies had in mind for what the purpose of Freemasonry was to be. We get a little "brotherhood" when performing ritual, but is not masonry supposed to be more? Is ritual the only thing that seperates us from other volunteer fraternal org's? Or should what we do once we tyle the Lodgeroom door determine our distinction? I feel that mining the past, what Anderson and his fellows were ultimately trying to accomplish by stamping the orgs charges and constitutions to paper, making it official that an order has become public, and has a purpose.
I believe that there are specific exercises that can be done in a Lodge of mason that build the bonds of brotherhood in the same way our tendons become stronger when we exercise our muscles. the bonds that tie us together will become stronger as we strengthen our Brotherhood muscle.

I will update this post frequently with results and information I come across with what could be considered "Brotherhood Building Exercises". Time to start stretching Brothers and limber up for a workout!

See you at Lodge.
Nemo me impune lacessit!

Saturday, August 09, 2008

Degrees: What Thomas Jefferson Thought.........








Thomas Jefferson, Founder and Patron of the University of Virginia, never allowed his university to give degrees. He considered them pretentious, irrelevant to learning and unconnected to the preparation for responsibility. This was not idealism. It was the opinion of the most successful practitioner of Reason. The purpose of Universities has now been inverted. Learning has become a goal-oriented process aimed at winning a degree.

Could this be true of Masonry?
Original masonry consisted of 2 degree's, with a third, for occult reasons, added later. It was a calm and peaceful useful society for the times. Once the "higher degrees" were introduced for membership purposes; knowing how man is gluttonous and awestruck easily, the Aspirant then began his goal oriented membership aimed at "winning" degrees.
For what, I ask?
Outside of satisfying the Ego, what do these "higher degrees" add to Freemasonry?
Having gone through the Scottish Rite and York Rite degree's, they added nothing to "bettering" me, they just added to the amount of dues I had to pay, also I had a couple of more "guys" trying to tell me what to do!

If Thomas Jefferson knew the folly in degree chasing, why are masons so hungry for degrees and titles?
Not only hungry: but impatient?
How can letting in people, in one day, without any training or proficiency, sit within a tyled Lodge Room and it be an environment of Equality?
Letting in cowans this way has cheapened our "university", and the selling of degree's to just about anyone, and then letting them loose on society as 32 degree dousche bags will cause irreparable damage to your craft and name.....
Why have our Leaders left Jeffersonian Reason for UGLE Obligatory neutered masonry?
Degree factories instead of Learning Temples for those searching Enlightenment...

Are we not supposed to be HUMBLE servants of the Craft?
Not egotistical title craving degree hounds?
The opposite of Thomas Jefferson………..
Time to go Old School with Freemasonry

Jefferson:
"Though you cannot see, when you take one step, what will happen next, yet follow truth, justice and plain dealing, and never fear their leading you out of the labyrinth, in the easiest manner possible. The knot which you thought a Gordian one, will untie itself before you. Nothing is so mistaken as the supposition that a person can extricate himself from difficulty by intrigue, by chicanery, by dissimilation, by trimming, by an untruth, by an unjustice."

Chicanery,trimming and untruth equate to one day masons enjoying the rights and benefits that many have died and laboured for throughout the Ages.
Shame

Wednesday, July 30, 2008

French masonic history and its historiography





French masonic history and its historiography

Presented at CMRC by Pierre Mollier on 9 Jun 1999

When I start giving a lecture about masonic history in France, I usually quote, as a precious advice, this wonderful sentence of the great French historian Marc Bloch: "There is a mortal sin for historians: anachronism". Being a Freemason in France is of course a quite different thing at different times — 1760, 1830, 1905 or 1999. When, in circumstances similar to this one, where I am giving a public lecture in France, I tell those present “Please, if you want to understand this lecture, forget what you know as a Freemason living in Paris in 1999”. Of course anachronism is a danger in all fields of historical research, and it is worth noting that Marc Bloch never dealt with masonic history. But I do think that masonic historians are, more than their colleagues in other branches of historical research, exposed to this “mortal sin”… especially in France. There is another difficulty which we face here today — I have heard that here in Britain, there is an organisation which is also called Freemasonry even if it appears to be quite different from what we, the French consider Freemasonry to be! So the word Freemasonry could be a concept that the French and English do not agree about. Of course, I am teasing the audience — but scholars should be careful about the differences which exist between the various masonic traditions. So, what could be the origin of interest for a British scholar to study French masonic history? I will try to convince you that there are some good reasons for you to look at French masonic history.
The first reason is the study of an original institution which played an important role in the development of one of the leading countries in Europe during the last three centuries. French Freemasonry was involved in the political, artistic and philosophical life of France. Even if French professional historian discovered it only twenty years ago, in most of the fields of French Modern History [XVIII to XX centuries] you cannot make a serious study without considering the role of Freemasonry.

You cannot study French Enlightenment without a glimpse at the history and work of the lodge Les Neuf Soeurs (The Nine Sisters) in the 1780s. You cannot understand the Napoleon adventure without considering the Grand Orient at that time, and so on. August Viatte, a historian of literature who wrote Les sources occultes du Romantisme demonstrated the great influence of esoteric masonry on Romanticism. But, at this academic centre for the study of Freemasonry [CMRC], I presume the public will be more concerned about motives to study French Freemasonry which are linked more to the general history of Freemasonry.
Most of continental Europe discovered Freemasonry through French Freemasonry. So in Germany, Austria, Belgium, Netherlands, Italy, Switzerland, Spain, masonic brothers practice masonry which is influenced by the French system. Their rituals have strong French origins. Masonic meetings are organised around lectures and debates on a philosophical or symbolic matter. A good knowledge of French masonic history is very useful if one wishes to get some key information about the history of the lodges in general in continental Europe. Moreover Latin-American Freemasonry could not be understood without taking into account the strong French influence in the 19th century. Masonry has played quite an important role in politics in Mexico and Argentina and you will find a bust of Voltaire [an embodiment of French Freemasonry] in the Hall of the Grande Lodge of Chile.
Even for British masonic history, the studying of French Freemasonry is very interesting. With original documents on lodges being so rare in Britain, French masonic archives from the period around 1740s to the beginning of 19th century could be very important.

The origins of most of the oldest masonic traditions are of course British, but the first testimonies are often French, especially regarding the history of rituals. The great Harry Carr has made brilliant proof of this in his Early French Exposure. Just as an example, the oldest knight Templars rituals in Britain are the Sheffield rituals circa 1790. In France the oldest ritual, recently discovered, dates 1750 and there are tens of manuscript copies dating before the 1790s.
As a final point by which I will try to persuade you of the importance of studying the history of French Freemasonry, I will mention the development of the higher degrees. I truly believe that the oldest higher degrees which are part of the first British Speculative Freemasonry have their origin between 1740 and 1760 and this phenomenon is particularly linked to French developments. All the documents on the higher degrees before 1760-70 are French, even the first rituals of Royal Arch degrees, for instance.
Petit résumé historique

The classical historiography of French Freemasonry relies on three names: Thory, Ragon and Clavel … even if we know today that their books are quite unreliable, historically speaking! Thory published in 1812 Histoire de la Fondation du Grand Orient de France and in 1815 Acta Latomorum. Clavel is the author of Historie Pittoresque de la Franc-Maçonnerie published in 1843, and Ragon wrote in 1853 the Ortodoxie Maçonnique. For many years the three authors have been regarded as the main source of research by those who investigated Freemasonry in France. Masonic authors — I intentionally do not say historians — took all their historical informations from the three mentioned works. The story of French Freemasonry and its historiography is the chronicle of how historical researchers authenicate or invalidate the work of Thory, Ragon and Clavel.

Rebold’s Histoire des Trois Grandes Loges, Daruty’s Histoire du Rite Ecossais Ancien et Accepté and Jouaust’s Histoire du Grand Orient de France (1866) represent the second step in the development of masonic bibliography in France. These authors tried to be a little more scientific then their predecessors, but for most of the time and whenever in doubt, they still referred to Thory. Rebold is a good source of information for the study of Freemasonry in XIX century France, as he was quite a reliable witness. Darury’s book is an honest compilation of what has been written on the high degrees during the XVIII century. For the study of the Scottish Rite, Daruty is an interesting account. His book presents the oldest version — not the original — of Patente Morin that Pike sent him; this is quite a valuable account as other versions of Pike’s document have been lost. Jouaust wrote his short book as if he was in the Grand Orient Archives for one day only! His book is probably the first historical essay on Masonry made at a quasi- professional standard.

Looking further for the sources to study French Freemasonry we come to the strange book of an antimasonic millitant. In 1912, La Franc-Maçonnerie en France des origines à 1815, les ouvriers de l’idée révolutionnaire appeared, written by Gustave Bord. This work quotes many new sources, but very unfortunately without giving any references. When the documents which refer to this work, however, are discovered from time-to-time, they usually show that Bord was right. His book is difficult to use, but the information given should be taken into account in a serious study of French Freemasonry.

With all these books we come closer to the issue of studying Freemasonry from the archival sources.

Arthur Groussier, The Grand Master of the Grand Orient was a socialist MP and an engineer, who in 1931 published the first book using modern historical methodology. When in 1931 he published Constitution du Grand Orient de France par la Grande Loge Nationale — 1773, for the first time a special point in masonic history was studied with critical examination through the use of the archives. Moreover, this work gave for the first time in the appendix a full transcription of many important masonic documents which nobody seems to have seen since the eighteen century. Arthur Groussier’s work is in this sense a model for historical methodology in the study of French Freemasonry. What he wrote might have been evident for a classical historican, but it was very new in the field of masonic history.

Two further works have introduced high levels of research standards in French masonic erudition — Roger Priouret’s book La Franc- Maçonnerie sous les lys and especially George Luquet’s wonderful book La Franc-Maconnerie et l’Etat en France au XVIII siècle. Georges Luquet was an acclaimed scholar in Philosophy and the Grand Chancellor of the Grand Collège des Rites (The Grand Orient Supreme Council). Both of the afore mentioned authors, but particularly Luquet, discovered new information on masonry in the classical sources of the Enlightenment. They studied diaries and memoirs of the XVIII century, correspondence available in the archives, Police Archives etc. and found numerous quotations on Freemasonry which gave direct testimony on the development of the Craft in France. For the first time Priouret and Luquet took masonic history out of the masonic ghetto. Even if Luquet’s book is not known as it deserves to be, he is as important an author for French history as Knoop, Jones and Hammer were for masonic scholarship in Britain. His work is especially important for giving hundreds of XVIII century testimonies and quotations on the establishment of the first lodges in France.

It is quite peculiar that the two most important historians of French masonry of the late XX century were not masons. During the 1960’s Pierre Chevallier published two master-pieces with Les Ducs sous l’Acacia and La Première Profanation du Temple Maçonnique. Those books extended the research of Priouret and Luquet. Chevallier was a qualified historian specialising in the XVIII century. He had a deep knowledge and insight into the classical sources and especially of the police archives. His book gave for the first time a quite accurate description of the development of French masonry between 1725 and 1750. The information contained in this work is about who joined masonry, where and when, where the first lodges were etc.. But, as the atypical scholar Robert Amadou once said — we will learn very little in those books about our predecessor’s Freemasonry. The question of rituals, masonic systems used, what was the regarded substance of Freemasonry in those times, what the people were looking for when joining — these are the questions which were left unanswered. Pierre Chevallier give very little information on these questions and it may be that as a professional historian he limited himself to the traditional methods of historical erudition and did not find that kind of information in the sources he most usually consulted — police archives. There is a part-truth in the following bad review of Chevallier’s book given by Amadou:

Book superficially perfect… but perfectly superficial!

Nevertheless Chevallier’s books are essential for masonic scholars looking at French Freemasonry. Chevallier published also a classical and enchanting — although maybe not academic — Histoire de la Franc- Maçonnerie Française in three volumes.

Another author who advanced scholarly research into Freemasonry in France was Alain Le Bihan. Franc-Maçons et ateliers parisiens de la Grande Loge de France au XVIII siècle and Loge et Chapitres de la Grand Loge et du Grand Orient de France are the daily tools of the French masonic scholars. If Pierre Chevallier got the maximum of information from the classical historical resources of the XVIII century, Alain Le Bihan for the first time gave a global approach and showed the treasure of French masonic archives. Alain Le Bihan was the first modern scholar to work on the Grand Orient Archives.
Resources for the study of French Freemasonry
Libraries
The Grand Orient Archives
The Grand Orient Library
Masonic department of the National Library
Regional and local monographs
Tours and Touraine — Fénéant
Toulouse — Taillefer
Normandie-Le Havre — Lecureur-Pringard
Aix-en-Provence

Information on bibliographical resources may be gained from La Lettre de l’IDERM, a monthly newsletter of the Institute for the study of Freemasonry at the Grand Orient. For further details refer to the Paris Pages; Musée du Grand Orient de France de la Franc-Maçonnerie Européenne — Information.




http://www.canonbury.ac.uk/lectures/maconnerie.htm

Friday, July 04, 2008

The Liberty Tree




This was brought to Light by a fellow French Orient Free-Mason



Liberty Tree
In a chariot of light from the regions of day,
The Goddess of Liberty came;
Ten thousand celestials directed the way,
And hither conducted the dame.
A fair budding branch from the gardens above,
Where millions with millions agree,
She brought in her hand as a pledge of her love,
And the plant she named Liberty Tree.
The celestial exotic struck deep in the ground,
Like a native it flourished and bore;
The fame of its fruit drew the nations around,
To seek out this peaceable shore.
Unmindful of names or distinctions they came,
For freemen like brothers agree;
With one spirit endued, they one friendship pursued,
And their temple was Liberty Tree.
Beneath this fair tree, like the patriarchs of old,
Their bread in contentment they ate
Unvexed with the troubles of silver and gold,
The cares of the grand and the great.
With timber and tar they Old England supplied,
And supported her power on the sea;
Her battles they fought, without getting a groat,
For the honor of Liberty Tree.
But hear, O ye swains, 'tis a tale most profane,
How all the tyrannical powers,
Kings, Commons and Lords, are uniting again,
To cut down this guardian of ours;
From the east to the west blow the trumpet to arms,
Through the land let the sound of it flee,
Let the far and the near, all unite with a cheer,
In defence of our Liberty Tree.

Thomas Paine

Thursday, May 29, 2008

Commentary on Bacon's Wisdom of the Ancients & Lord Bacon's Interpretation of Myths





by

Manly P. Hall


With the passing of time, things forgotten or neglected come back into focus, and I think this is especially the case in the example set in the field of learning of Francis Bacon.

Sir Francis Bacon, Lord Verulam, Viscount St. Albans, High Chancellor of England, was one of the universal geniuses of all times and can be listed in the same classification as Leonardo da Vinci, who took all knowledge as his province. Bacon's position in learning is unique for through his personality and skills he made possible within his own nature a unification of knowledge which is very seldom to be found in any one personality.

Bacon's areas of skills included first of all the legal profession. In this he rose to the highest possible office, next only to the king in power. As High Chancellor and as a legislator he was outstanding genius of his time. Scarcely less important were his advancements in learning. He can probably be considered the father of modern science and his entire approach toward knowledge was highly scientific. He recognized the fallacy in the academic traditions of his time and laid the foundation for what we call the inductive system of reasoning. Under inductive reasoning, science rose from a critical background to occupy one of the most powerful positions in the world today. He was a philosopher of great parts, a person whose intellectual skills enabled him to integrate most of the great philosophical systems that had preceded him. He was not only adept in western thinking, but in a large number of his specialized philosophical researches he seems to have instinctively incorporated a considerable part of Buddhist concepts although he probably did not know it.

Next in importance was his literary output. He was a writer of extraordinary genius. The essays, written when he was a young man, are still considered to be perfect examples of English literature. He had an immense vocabulary and a wonderful power of turning well meditated and well considered thoughts. In his field of literature he was a poet. He also transcribed and poetized a number of Psalms of David. It is believed on good authority that he was also the final editor of the King James version of the Bible.

In addition to these numerous and highly diversified accomplishments on intellectual and material levels, he was a devoutly religious man. His prayers; the attorney's prayer, the student's prayer; are simple, humble, and magnificent expressions of an indwelling expression of the presence of the Divine in his own daily life. His secretary and chaplain, Dr. Rawley, said of him:
"If ever the light of God descended upon any man in this century, it was upon His Lordship, for although he was a great reader of books, his knowledge came not from books but from some deep, hidden source within himself."

While this may be thought of as an extraordinary combination of abilities in one man, this combination should not be overlooked in estimating his attainments. He was probably one of the best qualified persons to approach the problems of daily life. As a scientist he had the basic skills and procedures, creating the modern scientific method. At the same time he was a scientist he was, as he says, "a humble child of God, taking orders always to be obedient to the Divine Will." We do not produce geniuses today that have such a span.

While Bacon realized the importance of depth, he was equally concerned with breadth. All scientists should cultivate religion and philosophy, and the arts should be grounded on concepts of true beauty and high morality. Those whose idealism is immature can develop a variety of skills, but can never have a true vision of universal purpose and human destiny.

All of these make the writings and his philosophy very important. A brilliant English writer said, "Quote me a sentence from any of his books and I will tell you who wrote it." This was a peculiar weakness of his ability. The principle writings of Bacon that have descended to us are the Novum Organum (The New Organ of the Mind) and the De Dignitate et Augmentis Scientarum (The Advancement of Learning). In his spare time he apparently produced some shorter works, and our subject deals with one of these light productions of His Lordship's meditation, The Wisdom of the Ancients. This little book; it has only less than a hundred pages; is not really a work in itself. It is a combination or a culling from his more important writings of analogies and allegories which he regarded as archetypal.

Bacon's Wisdom of the Ancients is of great interest to modern dream analysts, those studying symbols, those concerned with meditations, and those seeking to transcend the commonplace in the investigation of nature. Bacon was not addicted primarily to ancient learning; he doubted many parts of it, but he realized something which perhaps someday we must all discover; namely, that ancient learning is archetypal. He did not use the term; it was not in use in his day, but it arose from something that was not a conscious process of thinking. Mythology, to him, was a kind of dreaming, the dreaming of the world before the rise of organized knowledge. Mythology is not only the history of prehistoric times; it is a statement of prehistoric thought, of those patterns which are innate in the individual, those archetypal concepts which, though they appear in a thousand forms, are still always based upon some remote subjective experience. Bacon, I think, would have assumed that these ancient fables relate in a concealed way to experience of prehistory; of those who lived long ago whose bodies have long been in the earth, but whose strange and wonderful mental concepts, redressed in every age, have come down to us with tremendous moral force.

While most of these fables are simply extracts of his other works, they indicate the thoughtfulness of the rare mind that conceived and developed them. According to Bacon, this world is not a series of accidents, nor a production of blind forces governed by laws of physical matter alone. This world, as we know it, is a living thing, a tremendous composite. This living thing is ruled over by processes, by principles, and by laws. These laws, processes, and principles, as he tells us in The Wisdom of the Ancients, were personified, clothed, given embodiment in mythology. Mythology is a secret language, very much like the names bestowed upon the pieces in a chess game. They represent always principles. The deities were not arbitrary despots on some Olympian peak, but the personification of impulses, convictions, ideas, experiences, and intuitions of mankind from the earliest known time.

Bacon's fables all have a Grecian background, and when we look back upon the golden age of Pericles in Greece we realize that in those days the world produced some of its most important and powerful minds. Pythagoras, who gave us ancient science; Plato, the philosopher of his age and of his time; Orpheus, the great inspirer of religion among the Greeks; these persons and hundreds of others, including Euclid, Demosthenes, Antisthenes; all the great minds of that time certainly did not believe that the gods were a group of despots sitting on the top of Mount Olympus. The fables that have come down to us are simply the outer cover, just as in every religion we find parables, allegories, and fables to press home upon us certain truths that might otherwise not be easily recognized.

Those today who are concerned with archetypal subjects and also wish to test the depth of their own intuitions would profit considerably by the study of Bacon's little volume, The Wisdom of the Ancients. I should point out, however, that it was written by a lawyer, an individual whose career was greatly involved in statesmanship. He was a counselor of kings and one of the most powerful men in the realm. Much of his interpretation naturally carries him towards the application of principles to the office which he himself held. On the other hand, there are some of those fables that obviously have nothing to do with politics, legislation, or legality, but are concerned with morality and ethics. All of them, of course, are deeply tinged by Bacon's conviction that a Divine Power was the source and guide of all existence.

Probably most of you have read the children's versions of the Greek mythology and therefore will be able to follow at least a general outline of some of these fables. Perhaps you might be inspired to give mythology a second look because of the very interesting things that are contained therein. We have chosen some details from those fables which seemed to Bacon to prove conclusively that this wisdom did exist, a wisdom which, sad to say, we are in great need of today.

One very simple example follows. The principal deity of the Greek pantheon was Zeus. He was not the supreme deity, but he was the ruler of the mundane world, in its manifestation. He was the god king of existence. According to the story, it is said that in one fable Zeus courted Metis, and from the union of Metis and Zeus was born Pallas Athena from the head of Zeus, armed and helmeted. Now Bacon points out that he doubts very much if Socrates believed that story in its outer form, and he is quite sure that Plato and the icons of Athens did not. Therefore, why did they participate in this believing and also follow on to observe these fables? Bacon does not point it out, but it might be interesting to add at this time that the reason they accepted this was that they had been initiated into the state mysteries and knew the key. The rest of the world worshipped the face and surface of things as we do today, but to those who penetrate into the depths of things the commonplace becomes a source, as Bacon says, so miraculous that no other miracle is necessary.

Out of this little line of Jupiter, Metis, and Pallas Athena he developed quite an interesting pattern. The word " Metis" means counsel. Therefore, we may say that power, Zeus, took counsel to wife, and form the union of power and counsel was born wisdom. The Greeks reserved the term "wisdom" not to the person who had knowledge or learning; wisdom was the immediate participation and experience of truth. Only those who had had the mystical experience of identification with truth could be termed "wise." This is a very much higher approach to the subject than we have today. In other words, wisdom was a theurgist union with reality and had nothing to do with intellectual achievement. In the case of the sophists of Greece, it gradually fell to include professional educators. However, even in the 6th century before Christ, Pythagoras refused to be considered wise, saying that only God is wise, and therefore he chose not to be a sophist but a theosophist. He gave us the word "philosopher," meaning a friend or lover of wisdom. He never would accept the term of being "wise."

In the case of Athena also we have other interesting considerations. Metis, being counsel, gave Lord Bacon a concept of the importance of counsel in all procedures; that power must be governed by counsel. Out of counsel and power comes prudence, and out of prudence comes justice. All these things fit together in a series finally ending in the production of Pallas Athena.

Pallas Athena herself is a remarkable figure. First of all, she was the only virgin in Mount Olympus. She never married, had no love affairs, and lived entirely alone, from which the conclusion can be drawn that wisdom was not involved in any of the secondary procedures of life. Wisdom was complete and eternal in its own nature, having no affiliation to anything. It was remote and unapproachable except through the inner experience of the individual. It never compromised, and the suitors of Penelope were the compromisers that attempted to dilute truth. She never would compromise, and never in any way allowed the absoluteness of her integrity to be damaged. Therefore, she was descended to us as that form of integrity which cannot be corrupted.

This integrity is in the individual, in the world, and in the Divine Plan of things. Therefore, we consider, as Bacon does, that Athena represents the inevitable victory of wisdom, wisdom which is superior to all compromise, all reformation, and all change. To Bacon the supreme wisdom was eternally and forever the same. Wisdom does not grow, but is born full grown. Wisdom is not defenseless; it bears a shield and a spear. Wisdom is not obvious; Pallas wore the helmet, but when she closed the helmet she became invisible.

These different ideas can be thought about for a long time to test the allegories and the significance of these matters. Bacon summarized the concept of that true wisdom which we are all seeking as being located in incorruptible virtue, which on the level of government means incorruptible integrity; and wisdom, itself, defends itself against every approach. No one can ever accidentally achieve it. No one can ever force the gates of wisdom. No one can take over this eternal quality.

Wisdom of its own nature being the principle incorruptible, the relationship of knowledge and learning to wisdom becomes important. Knowledge and learning are expressions of the ascent of human intelligence rising along the steps of what Bacon called his "Pyramid of Pan." Knowledge is like the rungs of a ladder upon which men climb. It is also a road with many paths as in the table of Thebes in which persons of every walk of life, every degree of intelligence, every type of conviction are groping along; always in search of that which is better. They are constantly striving toward wisdom. Their strivings are forever changing.

Bacon, being somewhat of a scientist, liked to point out that the strivings of science are forever changing. One day w have one belief, the next day another. One scientist supports another, a third contradicts them both. Yet each one in a way is dedicated to truth, but to each truth is only what he is capable of experiencing. Therefore, Bacon points out that the greatest handicap to the advancement of learning is the human mind. Here he comes very close to the concepts of Buddha. He points out that as long as the individual is in captivity to the tyranny of mind, mind will hold him to the conditions with which it is familiar. The biologist will continue to grope along the lines of biology, the physicist along the lines of physics, the astronomer will continue to build larger lenses with which to view the heavens; but all these are not going to end directly in wisdom.

Man will discover wisdom by the experience of his own errors. Little by little he will come to discard that which is not true. It takes a long time, but one by one his errors defeat him, one by one his mistakes confuse him, one by one his false believings fold him in emergency, until finally he is stripped of everything that he thought would be able to support him. He is stripped of all his material assets. He is stripped of his concepts of government. He is stripped of everything that he has believed to be adequate; not because he is told to turn from them but because they have failed him; until finally, he comes into the gradual realization of the Universal Plan that underlies everything. Ultimately, if he reaches the apex of all of his teaching, he will come to that mysterious inscrutability, that power which alone is capable of causing and maintaining all things, for the search for knowledge ends in the achievement of consciousness of the Divine.

This has a message even for us in our modern world, a message that we need every day because we are still groping. In this particular crisis we are groping as never before. We are experimenting with things that we trust and believe. We are following the dictates of conditions which are insecure. However, we have not conditioned and regenerated our own inner lives; therefore, we are incapable of being wise. Wisdom is not merely the piling up of knowledge; wisdom involves the sorting out of error, and it is only in this way that we can gain the end we seek.

Another fable that Bacon makes a great point of is in the story of Pan. Pan was a nature deity of the very ancient Greeks. He was represented as a creature, the upper part of his body being human and the lower part the body of a goat. He had horns, a bushy body, and a pan-like or animal-like face; the face of a ram. he carried with him, wherever he went, a flute or a musical instrument consisting of seven pipes on which he played the music of nature. Bacon, explaining the mystery of Pan, tells us several interesting things. He says Pan represents nature, that part of the world which we can see. Pan is an immense creature extending through many worlds. The lower part of his being is animal, the upper part is human. Another form of the centaur, he represents the natural diffusion of things; the flowers, the meadows, the ancient ways, the trees, the birds. The pipes of Pan represent in a sense the melody and harmony of natural law.

Bacon was convinced that natural law is the highest form of legislation, that there is no law man can create that equals its importance. Also, that no individual, no matter how wise, how skilled, how scientifically trained, can break a law of nature without penalty. Therefore, he points out that man, instead of trying to protect himself against nature or exploiting it, should have learned to understand, obey it, and love it because it is the hope of his own survival. Bacon was very definite in his realization that man is constantly exploiting and perverting the natural resources of life around him. He regards himself as born to manage, to govern, to administer the world. While Bacon is not so certain but that this might potentially be true, he points out that the human being is approaching the matter in the wrong way. This nature god is not to be denied. Pan, although we don't see anything that looks like him in the world, is a very real being; not because he is an image, not because he is a creature that might have been extinct long ago, or a mythological animal like the dragon that may or may not ever have existed, but because Pan is a being. Nature is a being. Nature is not simply oak and birch, stars and comets. Nature is a being having within itself one of the most priceless powers that man can possibly understand : natural intelligence. The natural intelligence of man made him superintendent over the natural intelligence of the world, but man has substituted sophistication for natural intelligence. In so doing he has brought about a conflict between personal desire and natural law.

The tendency will be always to assume that man would ultimately attain a victory over nature, but according to the Baconian interpretation of the idea, the only victory that man can ever attain over nature is to form a constructive partnership with it. He can never change one of its rules. He can never justify a fault of his own that is contrary to natural good. He can never destroy the harmony of nature without destroying himself. The harmony of nature is the pipes of Pan. He hides in the reeds by the river and plays his pipes, and in the playing of these pipes he produces the melody of life. The melody of life is in color and form and number; the perfect coordination of all of the beauty and processes of nature. All of nature's processes, whether we understand them or not, are intrinsically beautiful, but man, arming himself against nature, has caused those things in which he disagrees with nature to appear wrong. It is the perspective, it is the point of view, it is the individual's own wrong relationship with life that produces the conflicts which we see around us every day.

In ancient times people were close to nature. They lived according to the seasons, planting and reaping according to them. Animals obeyed natural law and natural law guided the motion of the insects. It also dominated and ruled everything else so that where man has not interfered with nature, nature has seldom worked a hardship on him. While man's higher life rises above the empire of Pan, his inner life is not part of material nature. His outer life is part of material nature. His outer life is part of the body of the goat; his inner life is the human head that rises from it. To paraphrase a Biblical concept, it is the duty of every human being to render unto Caesar and his nature the things that belong to Caesar, and unto God, the higher nature, those things that belong to God.

Pan, or Nature, is never in conflict with the Divine Power at the source of life, but Nature, over which Pan exercised dominion, has its own rights, rules, and regulations which cannot be transgressed. The natural world is predestined to fulfill the purposes for which it was created. As Bacon points out, Pan has no children and therefore was without a successor. Pan, as Nature personified, was alone, without progeny. He gave birth to nothing because he already represented the complete structure of the natural world, the rules of which must be obeyed.

In the course of time, human beings attempted to depart from natural law. Assuming that they would improve upon nature, they exploited its resources for their own advantage. While humanity obeyed natural law and had not developed inordinate ambitions, the spirits of nature protected them and supplied all their proper needs. When, however, humanity compromised its own integrity and attempted to commercialize and exploit nature, its difficulties multiplied. It changed the bounty of the Divine Plan and transformed the earth into a place of merchandising. Man put fences around the land, claiming ownership over small parts of the body of Pan. As his fences became higher, mortgages further encumbered the land and man had to borrow money to pay the bills created. Finally the land was so covered with mortgage stones that in parts of Greece there is no longer any space for planting crops.

It followed that disillusioned mortals began to fight for the properties of others and the harmony of nature was corrupted by the stupidity of human beings. In the fable , the great god Pan was unhappy and his only recourse was to enforce the laws of nature which he personified. He knew that those who disobey the will of God or the laws of nature would ultimately discover the error of their ways. Like a wise parent, Pan realized that every person and creature must learn to experience the rules tha govern conduct. In the course of time, humanity would learn the difference between right and wrong. They would come to realize that if they kept the rules governing the mortal world they would live together in peace and share the bounty of nature without selfishness or greed. It was only by understanding natural law that the individual could come to know the rules and have the courage to keep them. All the forms of learning which are set up to escape or violate natural law are chimera, monstrosities, being born for corruption.

The world of Pan, though troubled to some degree, survived through classical times until the rise of the first great conquering and colonizing power, Rome. This was the first nation that was able to support the program of world conquest. It trained its legions and claimed most of the countries of its time as vassal states. It required its citizens to worship the Caesars as divine beings until gradually mortal politicians attempted to guide the destiny of the physical creation. When this occurred, the last words of the great oracle of Delphi, which had guided destiny through revelations of the Divine Will, were : "Great Pan is dead."

In more recent times we had a rise in atheism in the world in which it is no longer cried out that great Pan is dead, but it is even affirmed that God never existed. This, however, has no affect whatsoever on the great pageantry of life. The principles that Bacon recognized were the first primary causes, and these causes never change. Those who come along can build cities or empires, but they must always build according to the law, or that which they build will crumble; no matter how powerful they may become. Nature, though less hurried, less listened to, is still supreme. Among those arts and sciences heavily influenced was medicine. It was believed that Pan gave to humanity all the medicines of life in the flowers of the field; every cure necessary for his own illness. Men in their haste overlooked this and began finding artificial ways. Instead of following natural law, they brewed medications to cover their disobediences. This did not change nature which went right on being what it always was; the changelessness, of the Eternal. All superficial things change continuously. Every generation has its own differences, but Nature never changes. That which governed the first man will govern the last. It is not that we are weak when we begin the struggle against Nature; it merely means that we are beginning to have an inkling of what wisdom really is. This is very interesting and informative fable which gives us a great many interesting and valuable concepts to think about.

Another fable that Bacon gave close attention to is the story of Prometheus. Prometheus, he says, signifies Providence. In the story of Prometheus he is said to have existed in the formation of a human being. Finding it incomplete, he took a bundle of reeds, raised himself to heaven, and touched the chariot of Apollo. Where he touched the chariot the reeds burst into flame, and Prometheus came back bringing fire to man.

Prometheus was, in a sense, the individual who was against the establishment; a rugged individual who wanted everything to be done his way because he believed that his way was right. When he brought the fire to earth and gave it to mankind, humanity, instead of being grateful, went to Jupiter or Zeus and accused Prometheus of bringing fire down on them. Zeus smiled in his great beard because he was really delighted, but he looked stern faced and did nothing to punish Prometheus. Prometheus continued his way and Zeus was sufficiently impressed by what he had accomplished that he decided to bestow upon man the supreme gift; immortality. This is where the story becomes very interesting. It is said that Zeus wrapped immortality in a very nice package and had it delivered to mankind. It was sent down on the body of a donkey. The donkey came down the road to the edge of a river. Guarding the river was a serpent, and the serpent would not let the donkey cross the river unless the donkey gave him the package that he was carrying. The donkey, having no idea what he was carrying, thought it was a good deal so he gave the serpent the immortality that had been intended for man. This, of course, relates to the symbol of the serpent changing its skin every year. Man lost his immortality that way, largely perhaps because the donkey represents the kind of mind that is trying to bring immortality to man, and sells out on the way on the slightest pretext.

Prometheus gets into one tangle after another, but he never really is in trouble except that in his arrogance, his self-will, and his boastfulness he attempts to seduce Pallas Athena. That was a mistake. In other words, he tried to control wisdom. For this he was bound to the crest of a Caucasian mountain and a vulture was placed upon his liver to gnaw him day and night forever because to violate wisdom, to violate truth, was the sin that could not be forgiven. It was, however, ultimately nullified, because there arose in the world the great hero, Hercules. Hercules later became a demigod and was raised up into the heavens as a constellation. Hercules among his labors liberated Prometheus, and Hercules, as William James points out, symbolized the hero. In other words, he was the initiate; the divine man whose twelve labors were to redeem the world, and because he came as the Messiah he liberated Prometheus, the sinner.

This remarkable story now goes into a little more detail as to some of the elements involved. "Providence" (Prometheus), Bacon says, is more or less disobedient being, yet part of the plan of things. Perhaps in the words of Mephisto in Faust, he was part of the power of good while ever working ill. Prometheus represents individuality; the gradual dawning of selfness within the individual, and this is an act of providence. Providence was the lightening flash that ensouled life. When we analyze it in this particular context, Providence tells us that the human being was intended for a purpose; that man was providentially created. Man was part of the plan; Providence had ordained him, and Providence became his leader and his guide.

While the human being was in a desperate state of primitive existence, living as an animal with no particular skills against the pressures of a pre-historic world, and in a world of creatures that were not endowed with any providential capacities, Prometheus brought him fire. Bacon makes a great point of the fact that fire, on this level of things, was the beginning of civilization, and fire in the spirit is the beginning of religion. In the material world fire enabled man to gradually attain supremacy over his environment. Fire made it possible for him to cook his food, heat his cave, and fire his pottery. It also gave him the skills to make ploughs and later, unfortunately, to make swords. Thus fire was a twofold power; a power for good which, as light, brought him out of darkness, and a power for evil when, as force, it began to release the innate cupidities and ambitions locked within him. However, fire was the beginning a man's separateness from the environment in which he lived, the beginning of that providential factor which brought him to the rulership or leadership of the species of the earth.

Bacon gives a great significance to this fire factor. He explains how fire serving all kinds of purposes became a mysterious deity, a deity which apparently is self born, for a fire springs up. When it dies, it is dead, but it never dies as a principle. Every fire on the earth could be put out, and yet fire would come back. Fire became a kind of divine agent, a symbol of all the skills, powers, and potentials possible to man. He had two power factors at work; fire could be used to build or to destroy. He could use it to make life better for everyone, or to destroy cities and worlds. It became the most powerful factor in the world of man's experience.

Humanity was confronted with the supreme opportunity and the supreme temptation. Fire enabled the individual to protect his kind. It also provided him with the means of exterminating his kind. Fire gradually developed into the symbol of what we might call fortune. It became the symbol of wealth, for wealth came out of fire; even coinage was coined by heat. Fire became the means of bringing the precious metals from the earth. Fire burned on alters of the gods, and fires also burned in the camps of armies. Thus a strange division began to take place and, according to the Baconian Theory, this division under Prometheus was a providential force.

The Bible also gives us (Bacon was very well acquainted with the Bible) a clue to this situation in the struggle between Cain and Abel, in which we find the beginning of the struggle between common good and personal ambition. The parent of this problem was Prometheus who had a great desire to do what he pleased. This factor also was incorporated in the gift which he bestowed. The usage of it was to become the great test of human nature. It was this usage by which Providence would ultimately bring about the redemption of mankind. It was the testing, it was the temper, and the sword of spirit had to be tempered in the flame of suffering. Suffering became the punishment for all mistakes. It was not some deity sitting in judgment to punish people, for the mistake and its punishment were one thing, each inherent in the other. The reward for good is part of the good of which it is the reward. They are one single substance, each producing it's own kind of inevitably.

Out of the struggle for power brought about by Providence comes another interesting mythological figure; Fortuna, or Fortune; also sometimes represented by a figure called Fame. Fame is represented as a human figure standing on a sphere, in one hand holding a dagger. Fortuna or Fame is the measurer of so-called greatness, but we know the path of glory leads to the grave. Fortune and Fame are bridles which destroy the liberty of the individual. In the other hand Fame holds the urn that holds the ashes of the ambitious dead. Fama stands upon a sphere, indicating absolute insecurity and instability. There is no safety in fortune or in fame, but inspired by the discovery of fire and the rising power of the individual to work his own will upon others, fame and fortune came into existence. From these pressures we have not yet recovered.

Bacon points out in his more important works from which these fables are extracted that the end of all education has to be the discovery of what is intended; that the only truth that is important is that which is considered in the Divine Mind, and whatever was to be will be. That which has been, will be, and every action has a reward natural to itself. Integrity and justice is not that the reaction shall be what we want; the rule of integrity is that the reaction is that which is necessary to universal good.

In the story of the struggle of Prometheus we find Providence as well as many different factors moving man forward through a series of stages or sets in which he ascends this Pyramid of Pan. We find him passing through all the stages that were involved when Prometheus, in a sense, put man together.

Prometheus was among those who are said to have fashioned humanity. When he put mankind together he took a germ or a seed from all other creatures; birds, animals, fishes, insects, etc., and put them inside of man. The result is that man has within himself every level of nature. He is tied to Pan by every cell he has, and he is tied to the animal creation by not only his body but by his material propensities. His body is of the earth earthy, and the earth is Pan and nature. Therefore, the spark that rises out of this, the humanity in him made possible by fire, very often comes into direct conflict with the nature of his lower life.

Now man is not destined to destroy all these little seeds that were planted in him by which he partakes of all living things, but he is to become the Orpheus , the one whose sweet music will charm all the creatures of the world. Therefore, through his own harmony he charms all of the lower parts of his own life. If he lives in harmony with beauty and truth, all of the beasts of his inner life follow patiently and lovingly with him, as in the beautiful legend of St. Francis of the Birds. The lower parts of man are not bad; they are good and useful parts of his complete economy. The beasts of the field are not bad, but when man declares war upon the beasts of hte field, where there is an imbalance in nature and an inevitable consequence sets in. When the individual disobeys the laws of nature within himself, he comes in the end to a great tribulation because he has perverted the natural powers. It is his purpose to civilize the animals, not destroy them. When he ignores his responsibility to the animals around him he also ignores his responsibility to the animal seeds in himself. It is a beautiful, interesting, and constructive kind of fable.

Other fables of this general shape take considerable thought. Bacon opens his story The Fables with the story of heaven as a great vault in which all things take place. It is almost a chemical retort for under heaven is enclosed all of creation as we know it. Heaven was deposed by Saturn and Saturn, in turn, was deposed by Zeus. Bacon says that by "heaven" we are to understand the totality of things and, by Saturn, matter. We associate Saturn symbolically even today with crystallization and death. Bacon said that Saturn is matter, the material substance from which all things must be molded, and in explaining this he gives us the fable of Proteus.

Proteus was an old hermit who guided a flock of sheep. He had magic powers and could conjure. Anyone who wanted to capture Proteus, representing the symbol of 'forever change,' must ensnare him by magic and must then wait. Proteus can assume at will every kind of different form imaginable; bird, insect, fish, animal, etc. He becomes visible and invisible beings,, but to capture him he must be held until ultimately he is forced to return to his natural form. This, says Bacon, is the story of matter. It is also the story of we have forever with the changing essences and substances of life. Every form of matter passes through innumerable changes. To capture the mystery locked in matter we observe all of the transformations in which matter rises from the most simple form to the most highly organized creature. We see in matter the Proteus , that substance which can take any all forms. In any an all of its forms it may be examined but it can never be captured, except in its natural form. Therefore, we must patiently observe the disguises under which it appears but never hope to understand it until we can restore it to its native condition.

This, I think, was one of the great inspirations behind Bacon's philosophy of life. He was a profound student of matter. He wanted to know how it came into being, where it came into being, what it was all about. He believed that matter was a series of infinite disguises in which a simple thing becomes increasingly more complicated as the evolutionary processes result in the piling up of mathematical patterns of matter. All these forms may bewilder, but anyone who tries to capture these forms will find they slip through his fingers. He thinks he has found the proper and true form, and as he takes hold of it, it changes. Bacon points out that there is no way in which we can understand substance, essence, matter, unless we can examine it in its inevitable and natural state. It its most natural and primordial state it is invisible. This leads to the Baconian deduction, namely, that we must study things by their functions because we cannot find out actually exactly what they are.

If we study heaven as the great globe within which all the chemical experiments of existence take place, we must then cease to know the Creator as represented by the infinite diversity of creation. And here the Creator becomes a Proteus; for one principle, one truth, one reality takes on an infinite diversity of forms and appearances beyond conception. Yet somewhere underneath all this infinite change and diversity is one simple fact which man has not yet been able to become simple enough to find. He assumes that he will discover it by the reduction of complication and not by the magnification or expansion of this same complicated principle.

Always, also, Bacon is concerned with the legalistic phase. He has in his concept the idea of a government. He took a long, hard look at the government of Olympus and realized that obviously in its literal form it could not be true, but if the attributes of the twelve deities of Olympus were examined carefully, and their attribute qualities substituted for their name, a rather good legal system resulted. All of these beings and powers have a valid part in the administration of the world. There is no doubt that underneath the network and web of myths there is a legalistic form, a structure which can be made applicable to almost any system of government. This is true because this government is stamped and sealed upon the individual. Olympus is within each of us. It is a representation of the type of government that which we administer the small nation or our own personalities.

Many people cannot understand how it happens that the Greeks who were a naturally rather thoughtful people could get along with a god like Zeus who was a philanderer of good parts, supposedly very temperamental, and who was bossed about by a nagging wife. How all this fits in together to form a divine being seems a little difficult, but Bacon tells us in one of his works that the answer is very simple. All you have to do is look at yourself. There is something in you, the leader of yourself, which for most people is the mind. This mind is Zeus, and if you can find any more irresponsible leader than that, it would be difficult to imagine. The mind always tells you to do whatever you want to do. It proves to you conclusively that your faults are virtues. It leads you to every type of complication, and if it weren't for the mind's problems that it creates, you would not need a lawyer to settle them. If we use ourselves as an example we see that the individual, in the management of that which he can manage (and the only thing we can hope to manage finally is ourselves), the individual is very delinquent in his management. He does what he pleases, which is supposed to be the divine right of kings. They have the right to be tyrants. The individual forever feels that he has a right to be a tyrant, and most are to some degree. He also has the right to make and unmake rules and powers. He has the right to declare war upon the drop of a hat. He has the right to make friends and declare enemies, the right to accumulate anything he wants and to fight bitterly to prevent someone else from taking it away from him. He is constantly inconsistent in his attitudes and self-centered in the extreme. Therefore, you could not imagine a better ruler god than that. Remember Zeus is not the great deity. Zeus is a sort of majordomo. He is what the Greeks called a demiurges, or the lesser deity who rules only over the temporal world. He is accountable to the Divine as a good governor of the temporal world and its problems. In the individual mind is not actually the supreme power. The supreme power is vested in an invisible spirit to which the mind is accountable, whether it knows it or not. We have the same thing in the Nordic mythology. Odin or Woden is not the supreme god. He is simply the god of the twelve deities dwelling in the palace of Asgard. Above him is the All-Father, invisible, unknowable, to whom Odin and all other things are accountable.

Bacon uses the simple analogy of Zeus to indicate this secondary deity. So everything is a guard of that over which it has dominion. The mind has dominion over the body, and the mind, because it has this dominion, tyrannizes the body and sets it into very false procedures and ways. In order to prevent this, Bacon developed his inductive system of reasoning, based upon the simple and inevitable truth of the matter that the mind is the thing that must be improved. In its present state it is hopelessly inadequate. The mind must, therefore, give attention to those things which are above it and not all the time to those things which are below it. Instead of the mind spending all its time tyrannizing over the outer world or trying to govern it, the mind should first turn its attention to the higher world in order to understand what is necessary and what is wanted. It is for that reason Janus, the Roman god, has two faces; one which faces the public and the other which faces the gods. In this case the mind must become aware of that which is beyond the mind, because the mind of itself is earthbound and bound to the situations which arise from environment, heredity, and circumstances, and it is often very much the victim of the mysterious deity, Fortuna, on the globe.

The opinions, customs, and knowledge of humanity change from day to day. They become more complicated, taking new forms as Proteus does, but they do not become solutions. Each new form is a new problem, each new discovery is a new danger, because the mind is not capable of guiding itself by itself, and when it attempts to do so it becomes a dictator. In the Baconian system the only answer to the world's problems is to find out what the world wants, needs, and must have, according to Providence, according to the great laws of things, according to the rules that are inflexible and unchangeable.

Another interesting fable in connection with this is the fable of Persephone. Persephone, representing the human soul, is abducted by Pluto and taken to the underworld. Her mother, Ceres, the goddess of nature, descends to the underworld and tries to rescue her. She is helped in this way by Pan who is the first to point out where her daughter has actually been abducted. Mercury goes to save her but cannot do so because she has already eaten part of a pomegranate, the symbol of generation. Therefore, the soul is captured in generation. Finally, however, a deity intercedes, and Persephone is permitted to return to the upper world half of every year. The underlying meaning seems to be that Ceres and Persephone were both agricultural deities. Therefore, the seasons of growth, summer and winter, become the two halves of the year. In these two halves, vegetation in the winter fails, and it is said that Persephone is locked in the underworld; in the spring she is released and returns to the heavenly worlds above.

Another interesting interpretation of this fable is that the soul descending into the body is what makes the body fruitful, and all the good and all the true life of man is vested in this soul power or soul quality. When God gave the breath of life to man and made him a living soul, this was the beginning of man's journey upward toward truth. Bacon always aligns the soul to religion, assuming that the spiritual integrity in man is the direct manifestation of soul power, and that the soul abides in him a part of the time, and at death it departs, but at birth it is reborn. The soul coming into embodiment is the perpetual guide and guardian of man's life.

For just a moment suppose the gods had to take an oath. Who would they swear by? To Bacon who was a lawyer and probably had a good many perjury cases, this comes to be a problem. It would not be very possible to do as in one booklet written years ago, Heavenly Discourse, a god swears by saying : "By myself." But the Greeks did not do it that way. The great oath of the gods was the oath to the River Styx. The River Styx was the stream that divides the world of the living from the world of the dead. It is forever flowing, never ends, and became in Greek mythology the symbol of the inevitable, the immutable, and the unchangeable; that which is before gods or men; in other words, the complete mystery of life itself. It was that mysterious power from Eternity, the forever existing essence of life, which was the highest unknowable, for all things that live; from the gods to the smallest atom; live because there is life, and this life, therefore, became the most sacred of all things. And when the gods took an oath, they took an oath to the river of life.

It may seem strange, perhaps, but there are tremendous values hiding in these stories. There are moral lessons that it seems to me we would all benefit from, and while we are using our natural faculties it might be interesting for us to see what would happen if we would take some of these legends and interpret them according to our own insights, calling upon the internal to find the meaning of a symbol. This is the power of symbols: that they bring out of us something. Any person in any walk of life can take one of these myths, bring it down to a level of his own experience, and not only get a useful answer but may also get a clue through the symbolism to the laws involved in the situation in which he finds himself. I think this was the principle and idea behind Francis Bacon's production of these mysterious and truly charming fables.