J. P. Stonehouse

Morals and Dogma of Freemasonry: An Analysis (7 of 32)

2007-12-09T22:39:00.001Z

An Analysis of Albert Pike's Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry

Part Seven: Provost and Judge

Introduction

The seventh degree introduces us to the Masonic justice system, an all-encompassing and arguably totalitarian creed that sidelines crime and punishment in favour of measures intended to establish right relations between brothers. Here, crime is defined not as an act committed by the individual and deserving of punishment but as the inevitable product of an unjust socio-economic system. Accordingly, the criminal is to be pitied rather than punished and we must allow the 'laws of justice' written into the creation itself to mete out a punishment suited to the crime. Here, Pike takes the sensible view that prevention is better than cure and reveals it as the central dogma of Masonic justice: the only way to prevent the 'eternal consequences' of injustice is to eliminate injustice in all its forms, even inherently subjective injustices such as perceived sleights and 'crimes against happiness'. Pike's justice reveals itself as the justice of relativism and tolerance, a form of justice that solves the problem of establishing right and wrong and innocence and guilt by prohibiting the expression of moral absolutes and introducing us to a world beyond good and evil, in which the only real crime is to maintain that such categories still exist.

When reading the below bear in mind my central thesis:

that Freemasonry represents the religious and philosophical foundations for a fundamental re-structuring - a revolution if you prefer - of human social relationships and society itself, and

that much of what we see happening around us – the radical social transformation of the last forty years – is a direct reflection of this fundamental re-structuring in line with Masonic principles

THIS ANALYSIS IS REFERENCED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MS WORD/RTF FORMAT SEVENTH PART OF MORALS AND DOGMA ACCESSIBLE BY FOLLOWING THIS LINK.

7th Degree: Provost and Judge

Pike opens by informing us of the purpose of this degree: it is to inculcate justice in our dealings with other men. Those invested with the power to judge must do so without fear or favour and, moreover, without prejudice or preconception. The judge must judge others as he himself would like to be judged if called to account for the same offence (p. 1). This in itself is unproblematic, laudable even, until we take into account that which Pike regards as an injustice, his conceptualisation being so wide in scope as to invite incredulity:

"Every wrong done by one man to another, whether it affect his person, his property, his happiness, or his reputation, is an offense against the law of justice" (p. 1)

Having defined injustice is such broad terms, it is hardly surprising that Pike provides for a suitably wide-ranging means by which to enforce it:

"…Masonry seeks for the most impressive mode of enforcing the law of justice, and the most effectual means of preventing wrong and injustice" (p. 1)

Aside from noting the all-encompassing nature of Masonic justice, it is important at this stage to notice the focus on prevention and injustice, rather than punishment and criminality. This reflects Pike’s understanding of injustice, as something eternal in its consequences and containing its own retributive penalty, just as the acorn contains the oak (p. 1). This reminds us that Pike’s law is the law of nature or, in other words, the law of creation as established by the remote and otherwise uncommunicative Masonic God. Punishment is not something that is meted out by God Himself, but by the laws He built into creation, which Pike elsewhere refers to as the ‘Great Bible’, the truths of which are discernible to those guided by the light and knowledge of Freemasonry.

The penalty, therefore, is something "…ordained to follow guilt, not by the decree of God but by the law enacted by Him as Creator and Legislator of the Universe." (p. 1). Accordingly, there is to be no divine judgement: God will neither judge the world nor us as individuals, at least not in the sense understood by Christians, Jews and Muslims. Nor, for that matter, can there be any forgiveness of sin: if the consequences of injustice are eternal then what is done cannot be undone and cannot be forgiven. In fact, Pike states that God will never intervene to halt the consequences of an injustice, which will always be left to run its course according to the laws He established. Accordingly, Pike informs us that it is entirely possible for the consequences of injustice to flow from the wrongdoer onto others. Thus Masonic justice is the justice of the Old Testament, in which we are told that God visits the iniquities of the fathers upon the sons to the third and fourth generations:

"Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness [of any thing] that [is] in heaven above, or that [is] in the earth beneath, or that [is] in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God [am] a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth [generation] of them that hate me" -- Exodus 20:4-5

Next, Pike explains what he means when he claims that the consequences of injustice are eternal. In a passage that reads like a sociological precursor of the Butterfly Effect, he tells us that:

"Even the pulsations of the air, once set in motion by the human voice, cease not to exist with the sounds to which they gave rise […] The air is one vast library, on whose pages is forever written all that man has ever said or even whispered. There…stand forever recorded, vows unredeemed, promises unfulfilled; perpetuating, in the movements of reach particle, all in unison, the testimony of man’s changeful will." (p. 2).

The wrongdoer, therefore, is bound to his crime by chains that cannot be broken. In this sense, Pike’s holistic take on the consequences of human action amounts to the Masonic equivalent of Christianity’s Hell, the eternal punishment from which there is no escape. In Masonic terms, Hell is the realisation that we cannot undo what we have done, and that even if the injured party forgives us, and we perform suitable acts of penance and contrition, the act itself continues to reverberate into the future. Pike himself says as much when he informs us that the ‘superior intelligence’ will realise that there is no more fearful punishment than to see the consequences of one’s actions echo across time, knowing that what has been set in motion has attained a life of its own (pp. 2-3). On this basis, Pike claims that the practitioner of Masonic justice is likely to exercise more restraint, and by implication to be more just, than he whose religion teaches forgiveness of sin (p. 2).

The purpose of Masonic justice, therefore, is "…to restrain men from the commission of injustice and acts of wrong and outrage." (p. 3). The problem, however, is that Pike’s conceptualisation of injustice is so broad as to encompass almost every conceivable offence, even down to the slightest sense of injury or humiliation. Pike fails to inform us how it is possible to legislate for ‘crimes against happiness’ but it is clear that offences of this nature are entirely subjective*: an injustice of this sort is anything an individual or group regards as an injustice. Here, then, we see the relevance of Masonic justice to the radical ‘overhaul’ of our criminal justice systems, which have replaced punishment with prevention and, in the name of tolerance, introduced ‘hate crime’ legislation that serves to undermine moral absolutes by criminalising those who give voice to their ‘prejudices’. On a global level, we see this principle at work in the United Nations, which encourages us to display ‘positive harmlessness’ in speech, presumably so as not to add yet more pages of injustice to the volumes already riding the currents of the air. This demonstrates the totalitarian nature of Masonic justice, which is indeed a ‘most impressive’ system when we understand that the term ‘impressive’ it to be interpreted as meaning something that presses down, rather than something that incites admiration.

* It is this same subjective understanding of justice that can be found in a very recent introduction to our criminal justice systems: that of allowing the victim an opportunity to influence the sentence or parole hearing outcome by giving an account of the impact of the offence. This is an entirely arbitrary and unjust form of justice because it varies from case to case and punishes the offender according to the victim’s subjective sense of loss and grievance, rather than by an objective tariff that reflects societal standards and norms.

There is, however, hope for the perpetrator of injustice who, by repentance, acts of contrition and inner struggle, may purify his spirit and redeem himself. Here, then, the individual Mason can crucify himself and, as his own sacrificial lamb, offer his own blood for the redemption of his own sin. Such a view is perfectly consistent with Pike’s views as regards the divinity of man and the individual Mason’s role as Mediator (i.e. Jesus) standing between man and God in the Masonic equivalent of the Christian trinity. The individual must provide for his own salvation, because the remote and disinterested Masonic God offers mankind no Messiah other than man himself. Only by purifying his own spirit can the individual rejoin with the divine and return to the Great Light of Ain Soph, the originating nothingness from which the creation emanated.

Here we can see that it is the enlightened of Freemasonry that are to be the saviours of mankind, that great Profane mass which, being unfit and unworthy, must be led to salvation by the Messiahs of the Craft. The criminal justice system, and the State itself, are the means to achieve this end. As Pike informs us in the very first degree, Freemasonry’s self-appointed task is to transform the Rough Ashlar into the Perfect Ashlar: the non-Masonic State into the Masonic State.

It is hardly surprising, therefore, that Pike is entirely dissatisfied with existing criminal justice systems, which are regarded as unjust. The reason given is that such systems condemn those who are "…no more murderers at heart than the jury that tried and the judge that sentenced them!" (p. 4), yet were hung nonetheless. Pike’s argument is that we cannot know the wrongdoer’s motives, should not ascribe the worst to them, and cannot suppose that we ourselves would act differently under the same circumstances. Indeed, Pike claims that many of us would act far worse under the same circumstances, or at least crack under the weight of far less provocation (pp. 4-5). Pike’s perspective is "There but for the grace of God go I", which he then takes to ludicrous and relativistic extremes:

"Perhaps we have done acts that, in proportion to the temptation or provocation, were less excusable than his great crime." (p. 5).

In the Masonic universe, the crime itself does not matter so much as the circumstances and levels of temptation and provocation surrounding it. In this sense, there is nothing motivating the wrongdoer other than his socio-economic circumstances and past history (pp. 5-6). This may be true in respect of the thief who steals because he is poor and hungry, but is very difficult to accept in respect of the murderer. Pike’s beliefs reflect those of the Kabbalah: we are to look beyond morality and thus beyond conventional understandings of right and wrong and good and evil. These terms are in fact obsolete, by-products of a religious ‘tyranny’. The only criminal, therefore, is society itself. The only ‘crime’ that of social injustice. The ‘eternal consequence’ of murder is the penalty paid by society itself, the punishment that demands that society rehabilitate itself and corrects its own injustices, rather than punish the poor oppressed murderer. This, too, is a perfect reflection of the Masonic belief that the State is the instrument by which to perfect mankind. Criminality is not something that arises from man’s fallen nature, as in the Christian tradition, but from socio-economic circumstances transmitted from the past*. The State can intervene to correct this by promoting social justice, thereby eliminating the conditions that produce the act. This is what Pike means when he tells us that Masonry seeks for "…the most effectual means of preventing wrong and injustice" (p.1).

* If this sounds like Marxism it’s because it is Marxism: "Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past. The tradition of all dead generations weighs like an nightmare on the brains of the living."

It is for this reason that the Mason must never judge and is obliged to view the wrongdoer with pity and kindness, as a representative of "sacred humanity" (p. 4) regardless of his crime or vice. In respect of the errant Mason, his brothers are to be patient and tender and remember that "God pities him: Christ died for him". Here, we can look back to the sixth degree, where Pike tells us that "…anything for which men keep locks and bars, or that blushes to see the light, or that is shameful in manner or private in nature, this thing will not be [the mason’s] care and business." (p. 2). In reality, therefore, the errant Mason’s actions are to be overlooked.

Here, it is interesting to compare the Masonic Brotherhood with its Christian counterpart. First, we must recognise that, although Christ died for all, the Bible states that one has to believe that Christ was the Son of God in order to benefit from his death. Yet in the third degree Pike informs us that such a belief amounts to idolatry: mistaking the sign (Jesus) for the signifier (the hidden truths that lie behind what Jesus symbolises). Second, the Apostle Paul informs Christians that, although they must never judge non-Christians, they absolutely must judge their brothers and call into question acts and doctrine that run counter to the faith:

"But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named as a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner – not even to eat with such a person. For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? But those who are outside God judges. Therefore, put away from yourselves the evil person" -- 1 Corinthians 5:11-13

By contrast, the Mason is required to turn a blind eye to such things, his silence indicating consent. In essence, therefore, Masonic justice amounts to a licence to licentiousness, which is hardly surprising given the Masonic understanding of good and evil and right and wrong. We truly are ‘through the looking glass’ and in a world where black is white and white black, or as Pike puts it:

"It may be that when God weighs men’s crimes, He will take into consideration the temptations and adverse circumstances that led to them…and it may be that our own offences will weigh heavier than we think, and the murderer’s lighter than according to man’s judgement".

This is, of course, utter nonsense. Pike no more believes in divine judgement than he does the forgiveness of sins, and he has already made it abundantly clear that in the Masonic universe a man’s actions are his own divine punishment or reward. This is a point to remember as we watch our punishment-based criminal justice systems being dismantled and replaced with totalitarian systems of social control predicated on behaviour modification, tolerance and ‘hate crimes’.

Morals and Dogma of Freemasonry: An Analysis (6 of 32)

2007-12-03T22:21:00.000Z

An Analysis of Albert Pike's Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry

Part Six: Intimate Secretary

Introduction

The sixth degree retains the moralising tone of the fourth and fifth degrees, moralising that is demonstrably bogus and intended to convince the candidate that he is being 'made better' even as the Craft continues to chip away at his personal convictions and raise his duty to Masonry above all moral considerations. It is in this degree that Pike reveals to us the truly international scope and ambition of Freemasonry, the great society of World Peace bringing together that which God has put asunder, thus demonstrating once again that 'the Deity' of Freemasonry is man himself, a re-energised Nimrod fully intent on rebuilding the fallen Tower of Babel.

When reading the below bear in mind my central thesis:

that Freemasonry represents the religious and philosophical foundations for a fundamental re-structuring - a revolution if you prefer - of human social relationships and society itself, and

that much of what we see happening around us – the radical social transformation of the last forty years – is a direct reflection of this fundamental re-structuring in line with Masonic principles

THIS ANALYSIS IS REFERENCED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MS WORD/RTF FORMAT SIXTH PART OF MORALS AND DOGMA ACCESSIBLE BY FOLLOWING THIS LINK.

6th Degree: Intimate Secretary

The sixth degree continues the moral instruction of the fourth and fifth degrees, the virtues to be instilled here being zealousness, faithfulness, disinterestedness, benevolence, and the importance of acting as a peacemaker or mediator. Again, Pike starts by stressing the importance of duty, here described as a kind of ‘moral magnetism’ that controls and guides the Mason through stormy seas (p. 1). In this context, it is interesting to note that Pike appears to have abandoned the concept of the moral compass as defined in the third and final Blue Lodge degree. There, Pike describes morality as a force, a "..magnetic attraction of the heart towards Truth and Virtue" (p. 21), supplemented by Honour and Duty. Here, however, as in the fifth degree, Pike appears to have abandoned the concept of personal or private morality and seems to regard duty and morality as one and the same thing. Very often, however, duty amounts to blind obedience and the sacrifice of one’s own moral convictions. Accordingly, it is hard to understand why Pike would afford duty such an elevated position, if the Mason were not expected to perform tasks that might conflict with his personal convictions.

Pike instructs us not to seek the praise and approval of others but to replace this with duty and selfless dedication. He informs us that men were created to do good to one another and states that we must take nature as our guide in our dealings with other men. In so doing, he says, we our led to contribute towards the Common Good (p. 1). Unfortunately, it is rather difficult to accept this at face value. Even at the time of writing Pike would have been aware of Darwin’s work and realise that nature knows little of equality and justice but rather more about survival and competition. That Pike is aware of this is evidenced by his belief that the fit and strong should rule (Master Mason, p. 17), his disparaging comments about universal suffrage, which presupposes an equality and universal worth that he clearly disagrees with (Master Mason, p. 5), and belief that even ants and bees are more inherently moral than human beings (Master Mason, p. 8). Here, it is also important to remember that Masonry shares the Kabbalistic belief that good and evil are two sides of the same coin. As such, nothing is inherently good or evil because good can be used for evil and evil for good. Only in this context does his reference to taking nature as our guide make sense, because nature appears to operate on a basis that is beyond human standards or right and wrong.

Pike then proceeds to warn us of the dangers of hypocrisy and of judging others without first considering our own shortcomings and sins. No Christian would disagree with this, or with his desire that we should always look for the good in others. However, Pike goes on to state that:

"…anything for which men keep locks and bars, or that blushes to see the light, or that is shameful in manner or private in nature, this thing will not be [the mason’s] care and business." (p. 2).

When we remember Pie’s instructions in the fourth and fifth degrees, to be blameless in our dealings with others, this seems to portray Masons as ‘whited sepulchres’ that display all the outward signs of righteousness while hiding an inner corruption known only to the individual. Of course, if what ‘blushes to see the light’ is merely one of those relatively harmless vices common to us all then Pike’s comments can be taken at face value. However, when we take Freemasonry’s preoccupation with secrecy, obedience and duty into consideration one has to wonder if there is something a little darker lying behind Pike’s instruction. Certainly Pike himself would appear to qualify as just such a whited sepulchre, given that there is evidence linking him with the Ku Klux Klan. Add to this his alleged predilection for drink and prostitutes and we’re obliged to conclude that Pike’s preaching and moralising not only rings hollow but also bears all the hallmarks of a true hypocrite*. In this context, it is important to recognise that Masonry teaches tolerance in the form it is now taught throughout Western societies. Reduced to its most basic assumption, this form of tolerance teaches that anything goes provided nobody gets hurt and that we are all legally obliged to accept each and every ‘way of being human’. It is this ‘virtue’ that Pike is attempting to instil in this degree.

* In the third degree, Pike informs us that hypocrisy is the "…homage that vice and wrong pay to virtue and justice. It is Satan attempting to clothe himself in the angelic vesture of light." (p. 10). There as here we must remember that Pike’s reference to hypocrisy is a joke made for the amusement of the Adepts.

Pike then associated generosity and liberality with humaneness and sincerity, and claims that these virtues lead the Mason to fight on behalf of the poor and defenceless (p. 2). Perhaps so, but it is difficult to forget Pike’s view of the masses as found in the second and third degrees: an unworthy rabble, undeserving of universal suffrage, incapable of receiving or understanding the ‘truth’, fit only to recognise and acknowledge the Great Leader, the Genius of Freemasonry. In this sense, Freemasons fight for the poor and defenceless in the same way that Marxists fight for the working-classes: for the right to lead them to the ‘truth’ that their ‘false consciousness’ prevents them comprehending for themselves. Pike is an elitist whose Will To Power is thinly cloaked by words of benevolence and ‘goodwill’.

Next, Pike teats us to another little Masonic joke. He encourages the Mason to give freely and to be "…liberal, but only of that which is our own" (p. 2). Ostensibly, we are to take this as meaning that the honourable Mason is not to give that which he does not own. However, the hidden meaning is that Masonic tolerance is something extended only to those that share the Craft’s definition of tolerance. At root, Freemasonry exists to undermine moral and religious convictions, those of its members and of its host society. It exists to undermine all dogmas except its own, this being the dogma of relativism or, if you prefer, the dogma that says that there is no dogma. Members must rid themselves of their preconceptions and ‘prejudices’, abandon religious convictions based on divine inspiration and exclusivity. Such beliefs are inimical to the Kabbalah’s conceptualisation of God as a remote and incomprehensible force. In modern parlance, we are to accept and embrace diversity and different ‘ways of being human’, including the things that ‘blush to see the light’ referred to above. Those who accept this view are to be tolerated. Those who do not are to be branded as intolerant hatemongers, not because they deny the individual’s right to believe and act as he sees fit but because they refuse to legitimate beliefs they regard as wrong or harmful by actively accepting and celebrating them.

For those that wish to make mankind ‘as one’ separatism is the cardinal sin.

This desire to bring all of mankind together in an artificial and contrived harmony* is demonstrated by Pike’s description of the Craft as "Peace, brotherly love, and Concord". Here, Pike positions the Craft as the Mediator, which reflects the Masonic belief that the Master of the Lodge and Master Khurum stand in Jesus’s place in the Masonic trinity. Pike informs us that we must "…bring together those who are severed or estranged; to keep friends from becoming foes, and to persuade foes to become friends." (p. 3). He then proceeds to claim the following lofty and exalted title for the Craft:

"Masonry is the great peace society of the world. Wherever it exists, it struggles to prevent international difficulties and disputes, and to bind Republics, Kingdoms, and Empires into one great band of peace and unity" (p. 14)

*Artificial because it is predicated on criminalising and shaming those who dare to be different and refuse to sink to the level of the lowest common denominator. In Freemasonry by prohibiting the discussion of religious and political affairs until such time as the Mason has been thoroughly indoctrinated. In society by hate crime, sexual liberation, the ecumenical movement, and the totalitarian doctrine of tolerance, all of which are designed to discourage the expression of strong views and deep convictions.

Here, we can only shake our heads in disbelief. Can this really be the same Albert Pike who, in the Master Mason degree (p. 18-19), tells us that "compromises which bring fundamental principles into doubt, in order to unite in one party men of antagonistic creeds, are frauds…" (p. 18-19)? Apparently so, because what Pike is really telling us is something the Adepts of the Craft already know: that Freemasonry IS a fraud. It exists not to bring peace but to sow revolutionary discord, to undermine the Christian heritage of Western civilisation and replace it with a Kabbalistic world faith and communist-style political system predicated on ‘Liberty, Equality and Fraternity’. Here, we must understand that Fraternity (brotherhood) is the dialectical synthesis of Liberty and Equality, which stand opposed to one other. Brotherhood, therefore, amounts to the reconciliation or mediation of the conflict between liberty and equality. This is why the United Nations (a perfect ‘secular’ reflection of Freemasonry) states that: is predicated on tolerance, ‘harmony in difference’ and ‘brotherhood’.

"And let us dream ... of a true brotherhood -- and sisterhood -- that embraces and encompasses all humankind, and allows all people a chance to enjoy their inalienable rights, dignity and freedom." -- former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan

"Together, we must seek to further the basic ideals of all the world’s major religions. We must build societies that respect individual beliefs and practices. And we must nurture communities where people of all faiths and nationalities coexist in peace." -- current UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon

"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood." -- UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights

"The child shall be protected from practices which may foster racial, religious and any other form of discrimination. He shall be brought up in a spirit of understanding, tolerance, friendship among peoples, peace and universal brotherhood, and in full consciousness that his energy and talents should be devoted to the service of his fellow men." -- UN Declaration of the Rights of the Child

The aim of Freemasonry and the United Nations, an aim so impossibly utopian that only those convinced of their own divinity could believe it possible and desirable, is to unite the world. It hopes to achieve this not by producing ‘harmony in difference’, which is a contradiction in terms, but by a slow and insidious attack on moral absolutes and religious convictions, a great levelling of custom, belief, practice and opinion, without which ‘harmony in difference’ is simply impossible. It does this not by the revolutionary method of prohibiting difference outright but by the evolutionary methods of infiltration and subversion from within, destroying the core whilst leaving the shell intact, providing the illusion of difference without the antagonism and conflict inherent to the real thing.

Morals and Dogma of Freemasonry: An Analysis (5 of 32)

2007-12-02T16:09:00.000Z

An Analysis of Albert Pike's Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry

Part Five: Perfect Master

Introduction

Another mercifully brief degree, the fifth is intended to impress upon the Secret Master the importance of honesty and industry, and again it goes without saying that we are obliged to read between the lines to understand why these virtues are so important to the Craft. Yet again, this degree demonstrates that Pike is perfectly consistent in his inconsistencies and contradictions, so much so that they cannot be regarded as accidental or products of a lazy intellect. These inconsistencies exist because the candidate is not yet ready to receive the full brilliance of the Masonic light. For the time being, he must content himself with the offerings here and the promise of a fuller explanation should he advance through the remaining degrees and, in so doing, demonstrate his worthiness to receive enlightenment.

When reading the below bear in mind my central thesis:

that Freemasonry represents the religious and philosophical foundations for a fundamental re-structuring - a revolution if you prefer - of human social relationships and society itself, and

that much of what we see happening around us – the radical social transformation of the last forty years – is a direct reflection of this fundamental re-structuring in line with Masonic principles

THIS ANALYSIS IS REFERENCED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MS WORD/RTF FORMAT FIFTH PART OF MORALS AND DOGMA ACCESSIBLE BY FOLLOWING THIS LINK.

5th Degree: Perfect Master

The purpose of this short degree is to inculcate the virtues of honesty and industry. Here, we are, quite sensibly, warned of the dangers of idleness and procrastination, which will come back to haunt us later in life when we take stock of our lot in life and reflect on what could have been (p. 1). In this context, Pike informs us that the duty of the soul is "[t]o learn and to do!" (p. 1) and describes knowledge as the nutrient that causes the soul to grow, just as carbon, water and soil cause a tree to grow. In the fourth degree, Secret Master, Pike tells us that greater knowledge confers greater divinity in the form of an enlarged soul (p. 2), and describes knowledge as:

"…the most genuine and real of human treasures; for it is Light, as Ignorance is Darkness. It is the development of the human soul, and its acquisition the growth of the soul, which at the birth of man knows nothing, and therefore, in one sense, may be said to be nothing. It is the seed, which has in it the power to grow, to acquire, and by acquiring to be developed, as the seed is developed into the shoot, the plant, the tree."

The soul, therefore, if it may be said exist at the moment of conception, is merely a seed to be watered and nurtured and does not exist in the Christian sense, as something given to us, as it were, fully formed. This is consistent with Masonic convictions as regards the means to attain salvation and re-connect with the divine. Here, the soul cannot be saved in the Christian sense, by believing in Jesus Christ as the Son of God. Rather, we must save ourselves by ingesting the correct nutrients, such as the ‘truths’ of Freemasonry and Kabbalah. As Pike tells us in the third degree, Master Mason, the soul must be "…purified of all sordidness and sin which have, as it were, become part of its substance, by its connection with the body." (p. 14). Purification is achieved by nourishing the soul with light, which represents the knowledge and truth that will liberate the soul from its imprisonment in the material realm and facilitate its journey into the afterlife (Master Mason, pp. 29-30).

Pike also refers back to the third and fourth degrees when he urges us to study, learn and think so that we may be able to do "…earnestly and vigorously, whatever may be required of us by duty…our country, and mankind…" (p. 2). In so doing, we follow in the footsteps of Master Khurum, who in the third degree is identified with the Master Mason par excellence, Hiram Abif. Here, we must remember that honour and duty is to guide the Mason whenever his own personal moral compass wavers, meaning that when the Mason is required to do something that conflicts with his personal morality he is to remember his obligation to the Craft. We must also remember that, in Freemasonry as in the Kabbalah, good and evil are simply two sides of the same coin, and that which we might think evil may be only good manifested in a different form.

It is by adopting this Kabbalistic understanding of good and evil, as a kind of Jedi force to be balanced and harmonised, that the Mason can think beyond morality and do whatever is required of him to advance the aims of Freemasonry. If this means assisting the French Revolutionaries, something Pike boasts of in the first degree, and contributing towards the mass murder of one whole stratum of society, then so be it. In the final analysis, the noble end justifies the despicable means. All the Mason is required to do is point to the end result and claim that it represents the justice and mercy of God in equilibrium (Apprentice, p. 13). It is clear from this that the justice and mercy in question is not that of God but of man, who has usurped the role for himself. This is evidenced by the reference to Master Khurum, who in the Masonic trinity stands in the same position as Jesus does in its Christian counterpart, and thus occupies the role of Mediator between God and man and redeemer of mankind.

Next, Pike informs the would-be Perfect Master that he must neither conceal the truth nor mislead with a falsehood: "The Perfect Master must avoid that which deceives, equally with that which is false." (p. 2). One can only assume that the Mason’s obligation to speak and act truthfully is reversed as he progresses through to the higher levels, for at the end of the third degree Pike himself has this to say of the Craft:

"Masonry, like all the Religions, all the Mysteries, Hermeticism and Alchemy, conceals its secrets from all except the Adepts and Sages, or the Elect, and uses false explanations and misinterpretations of its symbols to mislead those who deserve only to be misled; to conceal the Truth, which it calls Light, from them, and to draw them away from it. Truth is not for those who are unworthy or unable to receive it, or would pervert it" (Master Mason, p. 32).

Remembering that Pike counts the lower brethren among the ranks of the unworthy, we can conclude, therefore, that at some point ‘higher up’ the Mason is issued with instructions that countermand the instruction provided here and permit the more enlightened Brother to desist from practising what he preaches. At this point, however, the Mason has yet to prove himself worthy to be informed of the deceptions meted on him - for his own good of course - by his more exalted brethren.

In a similar vein, Pike informs the Mason that he must never break a promise unless it is unlawful or impossible for him to keep it. Recalling the lessons of the fourth degree, Secret Master, it is rather obvious that this is a meaningless obligation because the Mason is required to obey only those laws that reflect Masonic principles:

"Pike defines ‘lawful’ law as that "..which is the fair expression of the will and judgement of the people…enacted of the whole and of every individual." He elaborates and informs us that ‘lawful’ law is the product of the general interest, not the private interest, and represents the work and will of all and "..the solemn judgement from which there is no appeal." (Secret Master, p. 3).

The above reflects Pike’s commitment to Rousseau’s political philosophy, predicated on absolute obedience to the General Will on penalty of being ‘forced to be free’. So, bearing in mind that Pike encourages the Mason to struggle to abrogate laws that do not reflect Masonic principles, we can conclude that the Mason is perfectly entitled to break the law in order to keep a promise made to a fellow Mason. Given that Pike’s understanding of a ‘lawful’ law is one enacted under conditions similar to those of a People’s Democracy, we can also conclude that the Mason is entitled to violate all laws until such time as the Masonic State is realised in full and all laws are enacted in accordance with the General Will.

Pike ends the degree by urging the Mason to live a blameless life, so that when judged by God it can be said that he never injured another, or benefited at the expense of another. This, too, reflects the Masonic understanding of salvation as something we must achieve for ourselves. In this sense, Pike’s thought reflects the Judaic roots of Kabbalah, with its focus on salvation by adherence to the law of the Torah. This is salvation by works rather than faith and runs counter to the Christian understanding. As the Apostle Paul asks us:

"Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?" -- Acts 15:10

Paul's point was that nobody has ever attained righteousness and salvation by obedience to the Law, because all have transgressed against it. The New Testament of Christ ends this legalistic focus by instituting the doctrine of salavation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ:

"Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law [is] the knowledge of sin." -- Romans 3: 19-20

"Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth [to be] a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, [I say], at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. Where [is] boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith [in Jesus Christ] without the deeds of the law." -- Romans 3:24-28

The Masonic doctrine of salvation is an impossibility: no mere man has or ever could stand before God and claim to be blameless, or to have earned his own salvation.

Morals and Dogma of Freemasonry: An Analysis (4 of 32)

2007-11-29T19:59:00.000Z

An Analysis of Albert Pike's Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry

Part Four: Secret Master

Introduction

Mercifully brief in comparison with the three Blue Lodge degrees, the fourth is intended to impress upon the Master Mason the importance of secrecy and obedience, although it goes without saying that we are obliged to read between the lines to understand why these virtues are so important to the Craft. Contradictory and full of the usual rhetoric, nevertheless the fourth degree confirms some of the key themes extracted from the first three, particularly Pike's fondness for the totalitarian political philosophy of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, a fellow Mason whose life has much to tell us about the 'truths' Pike reveals to us here, not to mention the Craft's claim that it exists only to 'make good men better'.

When reading the below bear in mind my central thesis:

that Freemasonry represents the religious and philosophical foundations for a fundamental re-structuring - a revolution if you prefer - of human social relationships and society itself, and

that much of what we see happening around us – the radical social transformation of the last forty years – is a direct reflection of this fundamental re-structuring in line with Masonic principles

THIS ANALYSIS IS REFERENCED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MS WORD/RTF FORMAT FOURTH PART OF MORALS AND DOGMA ACCESSIBLE BY FOLLOWING THIS LINK.

4th Degree: Secret Master

Pike opens by telling us what we already know: that Freemasonry reveals itself by degrees and enlightens the Mason as to the spirit, object, and purposes of the Craft only as he progresses through them. He goes on to state that the first three degrees, the so-called Blue Lodge degrees, are but the entrance to the Masonic temple (p. 2). The real action, therefore, takes place in the Masonic ‘Holy-of-Holies’ and is concealed by a veil that most Masons never trouble themselves to peek behind. Picking up where he left off at the end of the third degree, Pike reminds the Mason disappointed at the explanation of the symbolism of the first three degrees that the symbols themselves "…come to us from an age when symbols were used not to reveal but to conceal." (p. 2).

In the third degree, Pike also introduced us to Pison and Gihon, two of the four rivers flowing out of Eden, and seems to allude to them again when he refers to "streams of learning" that must be "followed to their heads…in the remote past…" (p. 2). Pike tells us that it is at the very source of these streams that we will find the origin and meaning of Freemasonry. This is hardly surprising when we recall that the Craft is nothing more than the Kabbalah re-worked to be made acceptable for Western minds. As such, the streams of learning in question lead back not only to the Garden of Eden but also to the Tree of Life. The Tree of Life is central to Kabbalistic thought and traces the ten Sephirot or emanations from Ain Soph, the remote, implacable, and inconceivable Deity.

"And out of the ground the Lord God made every tree grow that is pleasant to the sight and good for food. The tree of life was also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil." -- Genesis 2:9

Pike’s comment thus takes us to the heart of Freemasonry itself and the aim it shares with the Kabbalah: that of returning mankind to its pre-Fall state of grace. The irony here is that the Bible tells us that The Fall was precipitated by the original pair disobeying God’s command and partaking of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Yet it is the stated belief of Freemasonry and the Kabbalah alike that knowledge, the source of Light and, Pike says, the real basis of the human soul, is the key to returning mankind to its original state! In this context, it is interesting to note that one of the ways Freemasonry is fabricating this state of grace is by redefining good and evil so as to do away with the concepts as employed in the Judaeo-Christian tradition. This has a secular analogy: the soon-to-be ousted despot who changes the laws in a vain bid to grant himself immunity from prosecution for the crimes he has committed whilst in office.

For Pike, human nature tends towards the search for immortality, as manifested in the great works of great men immortalised and passed down through the centuries. These are described as "…the most genuine and real of human treasures…" and sources of influence that survive the grave (pp. 2-3). The most breathtaking part of Pike’s commentary here is his claim that the teaching of this knowledge and sharing of this wisdom is "...the impulse of a noble nature and the worthiest work of man" (p. 3). One can only assume that Pike is hoping that the candidate, still dizzy and hypoxiated from the rhetorical flight through the stratosphere that was the first three degrees, has forgotten the lessons learned there. Here, we should recall that Pike believes the masses to be too dull, not to mention unworthy, to receive the truths of the Craft. It is also salient to note that the corollary of this contempt for the Profane is manifested in his assertion that ‘providence’ has

"…appointed the three great disciplines of War, the Monarchy and the Priesthood, all that the CAMP, the PALACE, and the TEMPLE may symbolize, to train the multitudes forward to intelligent and premeditated combinations for all the great purposes of society." (p. 23)

So, the Profane are not to be taught and instructed in the secrets of Freemasonry but merely trained, conditioned, and compelled to accept its interests as their own. Such a view is perfectly consistent with Pike’s belief in rule by the ‘fit ‘and ‘strong’ and that greater knowledge confers greater divinity in the form of an enlarged soul (p. 2). It is, however, perfectly inconsistent with his views on the virtues of teaching, which make sense only in the context of Freemasonry itself. Those that seek after the ‘higher truths of Freemasonry are to be taught, whereas the lower brethren, together with the masses, are fit only to be propagandised.

Pike informs the Mason that his duty is to attain truth, serve his fellows, country and mankind in order to fulfil Freemasonry’s mission (p. 2). Again, we must recognise that most Masons go no further than the third degree, are deliberately misled at these lower levels, and thus serve Freemasonry without knowing exactly what they are serving and why they are serving it. For the most part, the lower brethren serve Freemasonry by lending it a respectable public face and providing a suitably innocent and bewildered response to the ‘wild claims’ about the Craft that essays such as this represent. As to Freemasonry’s mission, this is to inject the Kabbalah into ‘secular’ society and restructure State and society to reflect its theological premises. The end product will be the New World Order, a global society of ‘harmony’, ‘tolerance’ and ‘brotherhood’.

The purpose of this degree is to tutor the candidate in the ways of secrecy, obedience and fidelity (p. 2), virtues on which the candidate’s advancement within Freemasonry depends. Secrecy is seen as indispensable because the Craft imposes ‘solemn’ and ‘onerous’ duties on the Mason, one of which is the obligation to assist a brother in distress, even if the brother in question is unknown to the Mason. The Mason is required to lend his assistance even at the expense of his own life, and Pike tells us that the need for secrecy is to prevent the Profane from passing himself off as one of the Brethren and taking advantage of this obligation. This is true in the sense that there is truth in the tales of Masons flashing the ‘Mason in distress’ sign whilst in the dock, trusting that the Judge and fellow Mason will fulfil his obligation. As Pike tells us in the third degree, should the Mason find that his moral compass ‘errs’ (i.e. when he is required to do something that conflicts with his personal morality) he must rely on his honour and duty to the Craft to provide direction (p. 21). On the other hand, to accept Pike’s claim at face value is to ignore the point that the purpose and aim of Freemasonry requires secrecy: an organisation dedicated to infiltrating and infecting a host society with its own values must operate covertly, lest it be exposed and neutralised*.

* It is hardly coincidental that Common Purpose operates under the secretive Chatham House rule.

We can see this aspect of Freemasonry in Pike’s assertion that the Mason is not obligated to obey the law except where the law is made in accordance with the ‘great law of nature’ as enacted by the people. All other laws are regarded as the product of despotism, and Pike encourages the Mason to strive to abrogate these laws (p. 3). Pike defines ‘lawful’ law as that "..which is the fair expression of the will and judgement of the people…enacted of the whole and of every individual." (p. 3). He elaborates and informs us that ‘lawful’ law is the product of the general interest, not the private interest, and represents the work and will of all and "..the solemn judgement from which there is no appeal." (p. 3). The Mason’s duty is to learn obedience to ‘lawful’ law, which Pike believes to be eternal and infallible:

"It requires no commentator to render it distinctly intelligible, nor is it one thing in Rome, another at Athens; one thing now, and another in the ages to come; but in all times and in all nations, it is, and has been, and will be, one and everlasting; one as that God, its great Author and Promulgator, who is the Common Sovereign of all mankind, is Himself One" (p. 3)

The reader will remember from the second degree that Pike’s political philosophy is identical to that of the proto-marxist father of totalitarian democracy, Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Here, too, we find Pike borrowing from Rousseau’s On the Social Contract. The distinction Pike draws between the general and private will is pure Rousseau, as his assertion that ‘lawful’ law predicated on the general will is eternal and infallible.

"…when the entire populace enacts a statute concerning the entire populace, it considers only itself, and if in that case a relationship is formed, it is between the entire object seen from one perspective and the entire object seen from another, without any division of the whole. Then the subject matter about which a statute is enacted is general like the will that enacts it. It is this act that I call a law." -- Rousseau, On the Social Contract, Book II

"…the general will is always right and always tends towards the public utility" -- Rousseau, On the Social Contract, Book II

"When a law is proposed in the People’s assembly, what is asked of them is not precisely whether they approve or reject, but whether or not it conforms to the general will that is theirs […] When, therefore, an opinion contrary to mine prevails, this proves merely that I was in error, and that what I took to be the general will was not so. If my particular opinion had carried the day I should have achieved the opposite of what was my will; and it is in that case that I should not have been free." -- Rousseau, On the Social Contract, Book IV

"..when the state [is] on the verge of ruin,…iniquitous decrees having as their sole purpose the private interest are falsely passed under the name of laws. Does it follow from this that the general will is annihilated or corrupted? No, it is always constant, unalterable and pure; but it is subordinate to other wills that prevail over it." -- Rousseau, On the Social Contract, Book IV

It is the third quotation that reveals what Pike’s ‘lawful’ law really amounts to. Although Rousseau goes to great lengths to claim otherwise, the reality is that the general will is the tyranny of the majority in its purest form. Here, the great and good propose and draft the law, which is then presented to the people to be determined by plebiscite. The result is binding and, as Pike informs us, beyond appeal. Those who disagree with the outcome must accept that they were in error or, as Rousseau puts it, be ‘forced to be free’, compelled to recognise the infallibility of the general will. Accordingly, when Pike speaks of ‘God’ being the Common Sovereign of mankind it is evident that the ‘God’ in question is mankind itself, here represented by the indivisible, eternal, and infallible general will. Mankind, like all deities, is a jealous ‘God’ and the High Priests of Freemasonry can leave no heresy unchallenged. Those who deny the Deity’s infallibility, or dare to worship another, must be forced to recant and accept the ‘truth’. Nowhere is Freemasonry’s aim and purpose displayed more clearly: to supplant the established faiths and replace them with a ‘secular’ philosophy predicated on the divinity of Man.

In conclusion, Pike informs us that the Mason must always be true to his word and pledge of secrecy, at the risk of incurring the wrath of the brethren, a wrath "...as stern as the judgements of the Roman censors against him who violated his oath." (p. 4). Accordingly, the Mason finds himself under a four-fold obligation: to be faithful to his promises made; his friends and family; his country, and to Freemasonry (p. 4). The first and the last are, to all intents and purposes, one and the same, the second quite reasonable and uncontentious, and the third simply absurd given what Pike has already stated as regards the Mason’s duty to struggle against the laws of his country if they are not consistent with Masonic principles. In the final analysis, one’s obligation to the Craft takes precedence over all others. As such, the Mason is destined to be an eternal subversive until such time as the ideal Masonic State is fully realised and all "despotisms temporal and spiritual" (other than the despotism of Freemasonry and Kabbalah) are vanquished.

* The Roman censors were the highest dignities in the State, second only to the dictatorship. The censors had general control of the conduct and morality of the people and were not responsible to any other power in the state, being governed only by their own views as regards their duty and obligation. Romans lived in dread of the censors, who had the power to publicly shame and politically and economically ruin offenders.

The intent of Freemasonry in this regard is more than adequately demonstrated by Pike’s declaration that Freemasonry itself must be faithful "…to the best interests of mankind" (p. 4), a commandment that requires individual Masons to strive to popularise Masonic teachings and enlarge its sphere of influence. Needless to say, for Pike only the Masonic view of what is in mankind’s best interests is the acceptable view. The Mason, therefore, must do his part to ensure that the Craft becomes known as the "Great Apostle of Peace, Harmony and Good-will on Earth" (p. 4). Clearly, Masons have been very busy and diligent indeed, for these are the very aims and weasel-words of the hot-bed of New Age fanaticism that is the United Nations. Today, United Nations Goodwill Ambassadors and Messengers of Peace, celebrities one and all, do their best to raise awareness of the United Nations ands its goals, largely unaware of the deeper religious significance of the term Goodwill, a term used by the World Goodwill movement of the UN-sponsored Lucis Trust, based on Blavatsky’s Theosophy and underpinned by the Kaballah.

It is, of course, purely coincidental that Lucis Trust, and organisations like it, are praying for the emergence of a Great Teacher or ‘Christ’ to unite humanity and lead it into a lasting state of harmony, tolerance, and brotherhood.

Morals and Dogma of Freemasonry: An Analysis (3 of 32)

2007-11-23T23:32:00.000Z

An Analysis of Albert Pike's Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry

Part Three: Master Mason

Introduction

The third degree, conferring the status of Master Mason, is the highest that most Masons seek to attain, the attainment of the first three being the prerequisite for full status within the Brotherhood. As mentioned in the introduction to the first degree, pursuing the higher degrees of the Scottish Rite does not confer a higher status. Whether 3rd degree or 33rd degree one is always a Master Mason, in the same way that all citizens of communist states referred to one another as 'comrade', regardless of any other title conferred by holding office within their respective societies. It is telling, therefore, that Pike chooses this degree to inform us that Masonry deliberately misleads those at the lower levels, even more so when we remember that Pike's work was made available only to those who attained the 15th degree.

As with the second degree, the third is a masterpiece of rhetoric. Pike takes us to heights guaranteed to produce the elation and poor judgement of hypoxia, in the hope that we fail to spot the contradictions, sleights of hand, and philosophical jokes included for the amusement of the Adepts. Pike takes us on a journey to the symbolic world, breaks off to return to the domain of the State, departs again for the symbolic, and so on and so forth. We are told over and over again of Pike's love of freedom, liberty and equality, yet informed that most men are, and always will be, unfit to govern and think for themselves. We are warned of the dangers of factionalism, yet told that it is a great evil to force opposing creeds into one unified body, before being informed that crises, manufactured by the Great Masonic Leader spurring the little man to great and heroic deeds of warfare and heroism, provide the means to accomplish just that.

In terms of symbolism, Pike explains how the established religions have slipped into 'idolatry' by worshipping the persons and symbols associated with their faiths, failing to realise that these persons and symbols represent fundamental truths about enlightenment and knowledge as the means to attain savation. These 'truths' are then related to Hiram Abif, Freemasonry's Master Mason par excellence, and in turn to the Masonic Trinity, demonstrating once more that Freemasonry places Man in the position occupied by Jesus in the Christian faith. The degree ends with Pike's understanding of God and the Creation, which helps us understand why Pike's philosophy is, at root, predicated on the survival and rule of the 'fittest', and the nature of good and evil. His final parting shot is a discussion of the relationship between God and Satan, which culminates in the astonishing conclusion that Christians are the real Satanists!

The third degree, then, also evokes Conrad's Heart of Darkness. Pike is like Kurtz, who speaks endlessly of his ideals and aspirations as an Emmissary of Light bringing civilisation and morality to the ignorant savages, even though the reality of his efforts can be seen all around in the form of rotting flesh, heads on sticks, and his struggle against those who would deprive him of the sacrifices and adultation of the tribe that worship him as a god. Recalling my central thesis, that Freemasonry, the Kabbalah for Gentiles, provides the religious foundation for the New World Order, we can see that Pike's aspirations are identical to those now being enacted in our legal and political systems. Accordingly, we can look beyond the rhetoric and see for ourselves the result of these lofty aspirations: social fragmentation, moral relativism, the removal of all taboos, hate crimes, manufactured crises, the worship of man as celebrity, and increasingly elitist and remote political institutions that govern us for our own good and regard us all as potential criminals and subversives.

Pike's message to us is that, in the absence of a knowable God, man must take His place and negate the 'timid and lying morality*' of the 'idolatrous' faiths, to move beyond morality itself and accept that evil is nothing more than falsehood in words and action. If the pursuit of 'truth', therefore, requires actions conventionally thought of as 'evil' then so be it. Like Kurtz, Pike's only law is the law of the jungle, the law written in creation itself. Only the 'fit' rule. Only the strong survive.

* These are the words of Kurtz in Francis Ford Coppola's Apocalypse Now, which takes Conrad's Heart of Darkness and re-situates it in the context of the Vietnam War.

Finally, when reading the below bear in mind my central thesis:

that Freemasonry represents the religious and philosophical foundations for a fundamental re-structuring - a revolution if you prefer - of human social relationships and society itself, and

that much of what we see happening around us – the radical social transformation of the last forty years – is a direct reflection of this fundamental re-structuring in line with Masonic principles

THIS ANALYSIS IS REFERENCED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MS WORD/RTF FORMAT THIRD PART OF MORALS AND DOGMA ACCESSIBLE BY FOLLOWING THIS LINK.

3rd Degree: Master Mason

Pike sets the scene with a discussion of the nature of symbols and language, a theme that is central to a proper understanding of this degree and evident throughout in one form or other. He begins by stressing that religious expression is symbolism and that language itself symbolic, a linguistic representation of reality, action, and the material. Having made this point, Pike proceeds to observe that symbols are amenable to varying interpretations*, that over time they tend to lose their original meaning, and that this is as true of language itself as it is of symbols per se. In this context, Pike bemoans the tendency of philosophers to pontificate on the meaning of words and concepts to the point that their inner truths are diluted beyond recognition. He also argues that, in matters spiritual, these efforts are futile, given that the truths in question are by their very nature (i.e. the literally inconceivable nature of God) diffuse and incomprehensible (p. 2).

* Those familiar with the first two degrees will not be surprised to find that Pike ends this degree by spin-doctoring the fact that symbols are open to different interpretation to the advantage of the Adepts and disadvantage of his ‘lower’ Brethren.

In a typical example of Masonic syncretism, we are told that:

"The most abstract expression of DEITY…is but a sign or symbol for an object beyond our comprehension, and not more truthful and adequate than the images of OSIRIS and VISHNU." (p. 2)

Pike is alluding to a number of things here. First, that OSIRIS and VISHNU are of equal value, in the sense that they both attempt to grasp the essence of something unfathomable and beyond human comprehension. Second, that for these purposes words are as useless as images, because to attempt to portray ‘the Deity’ linguistically is as futile as attempting to define the nature of nothingness: we can only define it in terms of what it is not. Third, that one of the ways in which symbols lose their original meaning is by mistaking the visual or linguistic representation, the sign, for the object it is intended to represent: the signifier. The result is idolatry: the sign venerated as an object of worship.

Although Christians, Muslims, and Jews* alike would no doubt find themselves in full agreement with Pike on this last point, he immediately goes one step further and suggests that "…symbols come to usurp an independent character as truths and persons." (p. 3). In saying this, Pike is setting the terms for an attack on the established faiths, particularly Christianity and the nature of Jesus himself, as becomes evident later in this degree. For the time being, however, he simply observes that Freemasonry, in contradistinction to other faiths, enacts ‘sacred dramas’ of pure symbolism, predicated on the ancient Mysteries and the one ‘true’ bible, Creation itself (pp. 3-4).

* Those that follow the Torah as opposed to those that follow the Kabbalah. The latter represents everything the former tells the Jews not to do.

Pike then abruptly drops the subject and returns to the topic of the State. He identifies two forms of government as favourable to the propagation of lies and falsehoods: the despotic and the democratic. Surprisingly, however, it is the latter that Pike reserves for special condemnation, claiming that democracies encourage these vices because they encourage the pursuit of popularity, political office, and wealth. Pike also believes that democracies are unmeritocratic, because the ‘honourable’ and ‘worthy’ are usually runners-up to their less illustrious and more venal counterparts, with obvious consequences for the health and vitality of the State. Pike concludes that the propensity for truth, faith, godliness and loyalty varies in direct proportion to the level of civilisation and freedom: "…universal suffrage implies universal worth and fitness." (p. 5) For Pike, then, the masses are clearly neither worthy nor fit to exercise their democratic rights.

Pike’s main criticism of the democratic State is that is replaces fear of God with fear of Man, and he describes democracies using language common to fascism and communism: they are decadent. Democratic States are those in which "…the divine in human nature disappears, and interest, greed, and selfishness takes its place." (p. 6). Although some may find themselves agreeing with Pike on this point, it is important to note the reference to the ‘…divine in human nature…’, a phrase that captures the essence of the Masonic faith and the Kabbalah itself. The Masonic God is neither good nor evil but a synthesis of these opposites. Man, made in the image of God, has a nature that reflects the same characteristics. Thus for Pike the form taken by the State determines which side of man’s nature is given precedence: the democratic State emphasises the ‘dark’ and Pike’s ideal State the ‘light’. Accordingly, as was made clear in the first two degrees, the State becomes an instrument by which to perfect mankind. It has an inherently religious function.

This is made abundantly clear when Pike states that there is "…a judgment already pronounced of God upon whatever is unrighteous in the conduct of national affairs." (p. 7). We must, however, be careful about accepting this at face value. When Pike refers to ‘God’ he is referring neither to God as understood by the Christian or Muslim, nor to the literally inconceivable and unknowable God of Freemasonry and the Kabbalah. The ‘God’ in question is mankind itself, struggling to perfect and save itself in the absence of divine guidance from an implacable ‘Deity’. In this sense, the judgement of God is nothing more than the outcome of mankind’s own follies manifested as moral, socio-economic, and political disintegration, as ‘decadent’ States first bend then collapse under the weight of their own internal contradictions. This is Marxism through and through, with Pike allocating to Freemasonry the role Marx afforded the Proletariat: that of delivering the coupe de grace to the democratic-capitalist State.

Moving on, Pike claims that even the Despot is occasionally moved to acts of nobility, generosity, and largesse, whereas the democratic State is driven by a selfish, uncaring, and merciless commercial avarice (p. 7). In a similar fashion, Pike compares the ‘noble’ war fought for a ‘great principle’ or to uphold a State’s ‘honour’ with the war fought for commercial supremacy, the latter demonstrating the baseness to which men and nations can descend (p. 7) and the former, presumably, the very opposite. One cannot help but wonder with which side Pike would have allied himself during World War Two. It is hard indeed to see him lining up alongside the corrupt and ‘decadent’ democracies to fight the Great Principle offered by Nazism and its leader, Hitler, who manifested all the qualities of ‘genius’ exalted by Pike in his outline of the second degree. In this context, it is telling that Pike holds a view of human nature very similar to that of National Socialism:

"The ants and bees give each other mutual assistance, beyond what is required by that which human creatures are apt to regard as the strict law of justice." (p. 8)

Even insects, then, are more inherently moral than man himself, who must be forced down the narrow path of salvation as defined by, and under the tutelage of, the Great and Good of Freemasonry.

Pike builds on this example of the ant and bee to highlight what he believes is the fundamental interconnectedness of all things, with the individual man as just a fraction of the whole and "…individually connected with the rest of the race." (p. 9). He refers to this in the context of justice, stating that justice is not something to be measured with the SQUARE (i.e. to be measured in purely earthly or material terms) but with the COMPASS (i.e. the heavenly and spiritual), because we are atoms bound to one mass and held together by a preternatural law of attraction (p. 9). This is perfectly consistent with the Kabbalah’s focus on unity and desire to make mankind ‘as one’. Whereas we may see unity of this sort as artificial and oppressive, it is for Freemasons and Kabbalists the central dogma of their faith, an ‘axiom’ predicated on the belief that unity is mankind’s ‘true’ state and division and factionalisation a perversion of the same.

Interestingly, Pike then informs us that "[t]he circle of humanity is the limit, and we are but the point in its centre." (p. 9). In Kaballah, the point within a circle represents God in the centre of the universe, and here Pike is making explicit the fact that the Masonic and Kabbalistic God is none other than mankind itself, determining its own salvation and judgement, both collectively and individually, in accordance with its own rules and actions. The punishment in question is reserved for those States that are "…predestined to destruction…" by virtue of their injustice, plunder, and avarice, which demonstrates that "…as with the individual, the consequences of wrong are inevitable and eternal." (p. 9). Here, one cannot help but wonder whether the reference to predestination and inevitability, together with Freemasonry’s affinity with Communism, is yet another example of Pike’s remarkable gift of FORESIGHT, as defined in the first degree.

Just as Pike’s reference to FORESIGHT seems to be a prime example of a Masonic joke made for the benefit of those in the know, the Adepts of Freemasonry, so to does his exposition of the nature of hypocrisy. In a passage that one understands only as one progresses through the degree, Pike tells us that hypocrisy is the "…homage that vice and wrong pay to virtue and justice. It is Satan attempting to clothe himself in the angelic vesture of light." (p. 10). He then proceeds to state that Republics, Monarchies, and Depotisms are personifications of hypocrisy (presumably only the ideal Masonic State would be any different) and reiterates that they are destined to end in ruin, their ruination being the judgement of God against all that is unjust (p. 10).

This is interesting, first because, as stated above, the ‘God’ Pike is referring to is man himself, so the reference to the ‘judgement of God’ in fact refers to the judgment of man. When one remembers the very curious similarities between the organisation and hierarchical structure of Freemasonry and that of Lenin’s revolutionary vanguard, together with the typically Marxist focus on the State as the means to perfect mankind before ushering in a State-less Communist utopia, this could easily be interpreted as both a statement of intent and an outline of things to come. This, too, is perfectly consistent with Freemasonry’s love of hiding the truth in plain view, based as it is on the fact that the profane layman knows little about either Freemasonry or Communism, and that many of Freemasonry’s ‘lower brethren’, Blue Lodge Masons, are, as Pike tells us later, purposefully provided with inaccurate explanations of the Craft’s symbols and ‘truths’.

Second, Pike’s reference to hypocrisy is intriguing because Pike follows it by asserting that "[t]o seek to subjugate the will of others and take the soul captive, because it is the exercise of the highest power, seems to be the highest object of human ambition." (p. 11). We are supposed to follow Pike’s lead and regard this kind of ambition as wholly negative (and indeed it is), yet in so doing we overlook what Pike himself tells us in the second degree, where he states that the only kind of dominion worth have having is the mastery of mind over mind. Pike dazzles us with rhetoric in order that we fail to see the contradiction, and does this deliberately because he desires that only those with knowledge of the Craft and a good grasp of political philosophy fully understand what he is saying.

What Pike is really telling us is found in his claim that "Masonry alone preaches tolerance" (p. 12) and his description, found in the first and second degrees, of the active role Masonry is to play in the construction of a State based on the ‘truth’ as defined by Freemasonry’s wise geniuses. Pike’s definition of tolerance is based on his belief that the only ‘truth’ is that all truths are truths of place and time, this being identical to the doctrine of relativism that now has modern Western societies so firmly in its grip. This is the same ‘tolerance’ that is being forced on citizens as a political and legal requirement, enacted as legislation outlawing ‘hate crimes’, and criminalising those that adhere to conventional standards of morality based on the beliefs of the established religions.

Tolerance, then, is not the abandonment of dogma but the replacement of moral absolutes essential to the health and vitality of individuals and the State with a dogmatic and legally sanctioned instruction to accept, embrace, and appreciate each and every ‘way of being human’. Its purpose is to facilitate the very same ruination of the State referred to above, by slowly and insidiously chipping away at the morals, taboos, values, and norms that act as the social cement that binds State and society together. When enough cement has been removed State and society will collapse under the weight of its own internal contradictions, thus fulfilling Pike’s ‘prophecy’ of ‘divine’ and ‘predestined’ judgement.

By attacking marriage and family as sources of domination, oppression, and abuse, and promoting homosexuality as a ‘normal’ and ‘natural’ counterpart to heterosexuality, moral relativism undermines the basic unit of society. We see the result all around us today in the slow disintegration of State and society itself. This is happening because it is intended to happen. Relativism is one of a number of tools employed for the purpose of undermining State and society to the extent that the ‘revolution of the Ages’ longed for by Pike et al is brought about by default. Thus Pike’s condemnation of hypocrisy is, as he is only too aware, entirely hypocritical because he too wishes to subjugate the will and soul of others. Pike’s reference to hypocrisy is a Masonic Joke made at the expense of the lower brethren and the profane, for the amusement of the Adepts.

Returning to the subject of justice, Pike compares it with revenge, which he regards as something base and ignoble and beneath the Mason. According, when faced with a personal injustice committed by one of the profane, the brother should rise above it and regard it in the same way he would an insect bite or sting inflicted by a creature that knows no better. He then immediately reverses himself, by advocating revenge provided it is based on a feeling higher than that of personal retribution (p. 12), before telling us that the "…law of God is that the consequences of wrong and cruelty shall be their punishment…". Again, this demonstrates that mankind is the God in question, if only because it is difficult to imagine the truly divine exhibiting capriciousness and changeability on a scale such as this.

In this context, it is also useful to compare the Masonic ideal with the Christian: the latter tells us to turn the other cheek and love our enemies, rather than strike them in return. On this issue, Pike recommends that "…in general, we ought too much to despise those who wrong us to feel the emotion of anger, or to desire revenge." (p. 13). So, the Mason is to hate and despise those who wrong him, and ‘in general’ is to remember his elevated status and enlightened nature, which place him far above the common herd, and ignore the slight or wrong inflicted upon him. This, no doubt, is a prime example of the ‘loving-kindness’ Pike entreats the brethren to practice in the second degree.

Pike then returns to the subject of symbolism, but before we do so it is important to recognise that when Pike’s compares the profane with animals he is doing so on the basis of the Masonic and Kabbalistic understanding of God. Given that God is unknowable, the Mason derives his understanding of God from what Pike refers to as the ‘bible of creation’. As the earth, mankind, and the animal kingdom are part of this creation, one can understand the mind of ‘the Deity’ by reading the messages encoded in nature itself. This is one of the reasons that Pike can speak with such certainty about the nature of a God that, he says, is fundamentally incomprehensible. The lesson, of course, is that nature is cruel and knows little of justice and equality and rather more about survival of the fittest and rule of the strong, all of which are consistent with Pike’s conceptualisation of the ideal State. In this sense, Pike’s political philosophy and morality bears a striking resemblance to that of Nietzsche, a man who abhorred Christianity, defined human relationships in terms of ‘master’ and ‘slave’ psychologies and possession of the ‘will to power’, and desired a new form of morality beyond Christian and Platonic understandings of good and evil.

Returning to symbolism, Pike sees Kabbalistic principles in Genesis 2:11, which describes the four rivers leading out of Eden. One of rivers, Pison, is described as leading to a land of gold, and Pike claims that the Hebrew for gold (zahab) also means light. Light’s opposite is symbolised by another river, Gihon, which, Pike claims, leads to Ethiopia, the ‘land of darkness’ (p. 13). In this sense, Freemasonry and Kabbalah share with many other religions, including the ancient faiths, the belief that light symbolises truth, knowledge, and the soul’s journey to the afterlife. Where Freemasonry and Kaballah differ with Christianity, however, is in the belief that the soul’s divine nature must be:

"…purified of all sordidness and sin which have, as it were, become part of its substance, by its connection with the body." (p. 14)

The difference is not that Christians deny the above, but rather that they believe this can be achieved only by accepting and following God’s laws. By contrast, Freemasonry and Kabbalah believe that God’s laws, as contained in the Holy Books of these faiths, are in fact man’s laws, because ‘the Deity’ is incapable of communicating to us through any medium other than the creation itself. Accordingly, they reverse the relationship between the two. Masons and Kabbalists believe that they are following God’s rules and the other faiths are following those of man, that there is no ‘divine inspiration’ other than mankind’s own ‘divinely-inspired’ interpretation of the messages encoded in creation.

The Christian perspective is that this allows man to determine for himself the criteria that will lead to his salvation, and thus places man in God’s shoes. As such, the two positions are irreconcilable. This is just one of the reasons why the ecumenical and inter-faith movements have become so prevalent: they are based on a form of Deism, a doctrine that shares the Kabbalah’s understanding of God. As Freemasonry and Kabbalah represent the religious base on which the New World Order is being constructed, both parties understand the importance of undermining the monotheistic faiths by attacking their followers’ commitment to their Holy Books as works divinely inspired by God. A Christian can accept that he worships the god of the Muslims, and vice versa, only by denying that the doctrinal differences that define Christians and Muslims are divinely inspired. As soon as he does so, he ceases to be a Christian or Muslim and becomes a Deist, one who believes in a God that is uncommunicative and unknowable. He accepts the ‘God’ of the Kabbalah and chooses for himself the rules and laws that will determine his salvation. He repeats the original sin and accepts the words whispered by the serpent of old: abandon God’s lies and you will become as God is.

The significance of religious symbols associated with light, Pike tells us, relates to their origin in Sun worship, the prevalence of which in ancient times can be related to the sun’s life-giving powers and regularity and immutability. He then embarks on an etymology of the names of various gods, such as Adonai and Kadmos, and informs us that their root meaning refers to light and/or divine wisdom (pp. 14-15). Relating this back to the life-giving power of the sun, Pike links these ancient names to the death and resurrection rites of the ancient religions. This forms the backdrop to a study of the origins of Hiram Abif, the original Master Mason on whom the modern Mason is to model himself (p. 15).

Here, Pike points out that the name Hiram is a corruption of the name ‘Khurum’, which in etymological and pantheistic terms is associated with the names of other ancient light-bearers, such as Heracles and Horus, and thus represents "…the personification of Light and the Sun, the Mediator, Redeemer, Saviour."(p. 14) Next, Pike traces the origin of the surname Abif, identifying it with the primitive Phoenician noun ‘Ab’, meaning ‘father’, and finally to its rendering in Hebrew, meaning ‘the father’s chief workman’ (p. 15). Having done so, he then observes that the Egyptian deity Horus was not only referred to as the Mediator but, according to myth, was buried for three days and brought back to life to triumph over the ‘evil principle’. He also associates the terms ‘Heri’ with Chrishna and Buddha and informs us that Heri Chrishna and Herimaya mean "Good Shepherd", a title intimately associated with Jesus Christ (p. 16).

What Pike is attempting to do here relates to his opening discussion on the nature of symbolism. First, Pike is rather obviously suggesting that the worship of Jesus as the Son of God is an example of Christianity mistaking the sign for the signifier, with the symbol usurping an independent character as a person, Jesus Christ. In Masonic and Kabbalistic terms, therefore, Christians are guilty of idolatry, having mistaken the person of Jesus for the higher truth - the pursuit of knowledge and enlightenment - symbolised by Jesus. Second, Pike is relating Christ’s actual role to that of the supreme Master Mason, Hiram Abif, who as the foremost workman of the Father occupies the same position in the Masonic Trinity* as Jesus does in its Christian counterpart. Pike introduces the Masonic Trinity in the first degree, and informs us that it comprises the three lesser lights of Freemasonry: the active and masculine Sun, the passive and feminine Moon, and their synthesis, the Master of the Lodge. The latter occupies Jesus’ position as Mediator and is responsible for dispensing light to his brethren.

This is perfectly consistent with Pike’s interpretation of the symbols referred to above: in the same degree he informs us that the synthesis of sun and moon, masculine and feminine, is the Blazing Star of Horus, the light-bearing deity of the ancient Egyptians. In this sense, the Master of the Lodge not only occupies the position of Horus but also that of the Pharaohs of Egypt, who were believed to be Osiris/Horus incarnate and worshipped as Gods. The death and resurrection myth of Osiris/Horus was associated with the death of the old Pharaoh and institution of the new in what amounts to a precursor of the European monarchical tradition: "The King is Dead! Long live the King!" Again, therefore, we are provided with an example of the divinity of Man, predicated on a ‘true’ understanding of religious symbolism. In turn, this ‘truth’ is predicated on the Gnostic and Kabbalistic traditions of salvation through knowledge of the truths hidden in the Holy Books, hidden so as to ensure that the profane were provided with truths they were capable of understanding.

Having turned the tables on Christianity and identified Christians as profane idolaters, Pike returns once more to the problem of the State (p. 17). Again, democracy is excoriated as an evil to be avoided, this time on the grounds that it encourages flattery and deceit and gives the masses, which Pike regards as unfit to exercise their democratic rights and freedoms, licence to do as they please. He then proceeds to express a preference for the appointment of those most fit to rule, as he does in the second degree, before providing us with the following, very curious, statement: "By no other rule is it possible to preserve the liberties of the State" (p. 17). This is interesting indeed, because Pike‘s reference to the ‘liberties of the State’ rather than the ‘liberties of the People’ tells us that he is does not believe in natural rights.

Accordingly, Pike would no doubt disapprove of the English common law tradition, which is - or was, rather, until European Union law began to take precedence over English law - based on this doctrine. The importance here is that this doctrine, together with the common law tradition, limits the State to instituting and upholding laws that protect the natural rights of citizens. As such, natural rights act as a buffer against unwarranted encroachment by the State and any attempt to limit the People’s liberties. The alternative to this doctrine is the belief that rights are conferred by the State and thus subject to more-or-less arbitrary amendment and revocation. Thus natural rights become the ‘liberties of the State’, owned, controlled, and allocated by those who ‘know best’.

Pike then repeats his accusations as regards the qualities of leaders in democratic societies: hollow, heartless, selfish, they make the truly gifted and idealistic leader withdraw in disgust. Pike contrasts this with the Masonic Genius, the ‘great soul’ stirring the people to noble, heroic, and generous deeds with his ‘wise and manly’ actions (p. 18). This, in short, is a justification for the mass organisation of the population in line with the leader’s precepts, and indicative of a socialist mindset that just can’t leave people alone to live their own lives in the manner they see fit. It is, moreover, perfectly consistent with a Statist understanding of rights and liberties, conferred by the State on condition of satisfactory completion of certain designated ‘responsibilities’.

In a similar manner, Pike laments the factionalisation of societies into parties, each grouping following and adoring its own leader. Obviously, Pike is not so much concerned with the people following and being led as he is with ensuring that the people follow and are led by the ‘correct’ leader, one who leads the people in line with the wisdom and genius of Freemasonry. He proceeds to describe the division of a country into parties, each seeking to form the next government, as ‘contemptible’ and tells us that such countries are "...in the last stages of decay…" (p. 18), before again reversing himself by setting the ground-rules for a party system based on reason and sound Masonic principles rather than misplaced confidence in a leader! Pike is clearly toying with us here, just as he is when he states the following, another of his little ‘Masonic Jokes’:

"Compromises which bring fundamental principles into doubt, in order to unite in one party men of antagonistic creeds, are frauds…" (p. 18-19)

Pike was no doubt chuckling to himself as he wrote this, because this last quote could quite easily provide the basis for a dictionary definition of Freemasonry itself! Freemasonry as an organisation forms its artificial ‘brotherhood of man’ by prohibiting members from discussing political and religious issues, until such time as they have demonstrated acceptance of the Masonic creed. This Masonic creed is predicated on relativism, the belief that all creeds - other than the Masonic creed itself of course - reflect the knowledge and beliefs of the time. A Masonic education, as provided by Adepts such as Pike, is, as we are now seeing for ourselves, based on breaking down the initiate’s commitment to his own ‘fundamental principles’ and replacing them with those of Freemasonry. This is the only means by which ‘harmony’ can be imposed on individuals of different cultural, religious, socio-economic, and political backgrounds.

Pike is quite right to identify it as a fraud, and not only because it requires the participant to abandon his commitment to the ‘fundamental principles’ that make him unique and define him as a person. The fraud that Freemasonry has perpetuated for so long is that the stated reason for its existence, to ‘make good men better’, hides the reality of the organisation as a tool to effect a gradual yet wholesale transformation of society. Freemasonry as an organisation seeks to revolutionise society by evolutionary means. It is, as we shall see below, controlled and directed by Adepts who deliberately mislead those at the lower levels of the organisation. Its organising principle is identical to that of Lenin’s revolutionary vanguard. Its members are encouraged to inject Masonic principles into society in whatever way and in whatever context they can. Its religious and political doctrines are identical to the Kabbalah and Communism respectively. They form the basis of a new global society, a New World Order, being constructed around us.

* More accurately, the organising principle of the vanguard is identical to that of Freemasonry. The latter is the chicken, the former the egg.

Freemasonry brings ‘the brethren’ together for the purposes of driving everyone else apart from their beliefs and values, by working surreptitiously to build a society and polity based on Masonic principles and attacking faiths and values that stand opposed to it. Like any revolution, this is achieved by separating a population, by force or subversion, from its commitment to the norms, values, and social and political structures of the target society.

Following a brief foray into the symbolic, where we are told that the ancient Egyptian practice of arranging deities in dialectic triads of father, mother, and son is reflected in the Masonic preoccupation with triangles (pp. 19-20), Pike moves on to the subject of morality. Pike defines morality as a force, a "..magnetic attraction of the heart towards True and Virtue" (p. 21). Operating much like a compass, morality is supported by Honour and Duty, which serve as polestars guiding the Masonic navigator through regions where the compass errs (p. 21). It will not escape the reader’s attention that Pike is encouraging the Mason to simply grit his teeth and do his Masonic duty when placed in, or asked to deal with, circumstances he finds morally objectionable or of a dubious nature. In this sense, the compass ‘errs’ when the individual Mason’s own morals clash with the requirements of the Craft. In such case, the Mason should remember his solemn and blood-curdling oath and acknowledge his pledge to the Brotherhood.

The friendship and allegiance owed to the Brotherhood by the Mason is also a force, and one found among the ‘profane’ during times of national distress. Pike tells us that "…when the pressure of calamity and danger is upon an order or a country, the members or the citizens ought to be the more closely united by the cohesion of sympathy and inter-dependence." (p. 21) To understand what Pike is implying here we must recall his comments about the evils of factionalisation, together with his little joke about the ‘fraudulent’ nature of compromise between antagonistic creeds. Just as the Masonic fraternity is brought about my artificial means, a sense of fraternity among the profane can arise only through an actual or engineered threat common to all. Faced with such a threat, one does not abandon one’s views so much as set them aside in order to work alongside one’s ideological or religious ‘enemy’ in order combat the threat. Chaos and disturbance, therefore, can create an environment of social harmony, order, and unity. In this context, it is important to recognise that the watchword of the 33rd and highest degree of the Scottish Rite is Ordo Ab Chao, meaning Order From Chaos.

We see just such an engineered threat in so-called anthropogenic global warming, which has been elevated to the level of an axiom and is preached to us with rigour and zeal by the evangelists of the New Age. On the one hand, we are told that periods of warming occur in cycles and that we are now at the cusp of just such a cycle, and on the other than man is somehow responsible for the current warming. Similarly, we are told that the build-up to these periods of major warming can be measured in centuries, yet somehow only fifty or so years of mass industrialisation has managed to ‘cause’ this particular warming. The scientific evidence found in ice cores indicates that in previous cycles carbon dioxide levels rose after the warming cycle began, but when challenged on this point global warming advocates inform us that this is ‘irrelevant’ and insist that carbon dioxide levels are the main causal factor. And all the while, those who challenge the new orthodoxy are derided as ideological fanatics in ad hominem attacks that never address the questions raised.

Why is this happening? A clue is provided by the website of the global Live Earth event of July 2007. The visitor to this site will notice that the Live Earth logo bears an uncanny resemblance to the Masonic and Kabbalistic ‘point within a circle’, representing ‘god’ – divine man - in the centre of the universe. The visitor will also note that the movement behind the event is known by the acronym SOS, standing not for Save Our Souls but Save Our Selves. Live Earth, we are told, "…used the global reach of music to engage people on a mass scale to combat our climate crisis" and, in words usually used in the context of religious revivals and warfare, visitors to the site are asked to Answer The Call. The site informs us that: "Live Earth's 24 hours of music across 7 continents delivered a worldwide call to action and the solutions necessary to answer that call. Live Earth launched a multi-year campaign to drive individuals, corporations and governments to take action to solve the climate crisis."

Quite how a pop concert ‘delivered the solutions necessary to answer the call’ is not made clear, because to do so would be to admit that the real purpose of the event, and the doctrine of man-made global warming itself, is not to combat a threat per se but to unite people by suggesting that a threat made by man can also be resolved by him. The message is that ‘we’re all in this together’ and thus need to work together in order to find the ‘solution’. Global ‘consciousness raising’ events such as Live Earth reflect the utopianism of the Kabbalah’s aim to bring the world together and make it ‘as one’, a man-made earthly paradise for the purpose of restoring man to his pristine pre-Fall position without recourse to God himself. Divine Man determining his own salvation.

"Revolutions", says Pike, "have long roots in the past", by which he means that revolutions very often are motivated by a long-standing sense of injustice and, in a Masonic context, that the revolution currently being prepared for us has origins that stretch back at least as far as Freemasonry itself, and quite probably a good deal farther. It is for the good of mankind that Pike’s ideal Statesman shapes and controls public opinion and directs the ‘fickle humours’ of the people, stirring them to feats of heroism, glory, renown and immortality (p. 23). In so doing, the Masonic Genius is merely following the requirements of Providence itself, which has "…appointed the three great disciplines of War, the Monarchy and the Priesthood, all that the CAMP, the PALACE, and the TEMPLE may symbolize, to train the multitudes forward to intelligent and premeditated combinations for all the great purposes of society." (p. 23) And, for Pike and those like him, if one has to hurry the training along, by twisting circumstances to make them useable as ‘learning tools’, then so be it. Providence herself will smile on such endeavours.

In this way, Pike tells us in an ‘amusing’ play on words, mankind ‘advances by degrees’. This represents the evolutionary revolution Freemasonry is enacting, by slowly and insidiously recasting society in its own image. Pike describes the process thus:

"The removal of one pressing calamity gives courage to attempt the removal of the remaining evils, rendering men more sensitive to them, or perhaps sensitive for the first time. Serfs that writhe under the whip are not disquieted about their political rights; manumitted from personal slavery, they be come sensitive to political oppression. Liberated from arbitrary power, and governed by the law alone, they begin to scrutinize the law itself, and desire to be governed, not only by law, but by what they deem the best law. And when the civil or temporal despotism has been set aside, and the municipal law has been moulded on the principles of an enlightened jurisprudence, they may wake to the discovery that they are living under some priestly or ecclesiastical despotism, and become desirous of working a reformation there also."

This sounds innocuous enough, perfectly reasonable in fact, when taken out of context. In context, however, it takes on the appearance of a blueprint for perpetual revolution and the continuous examination, overthrow, and replacement of everything in pursuit of legal and civil perfection. The attainment of formal political freedom and universal suffrage leads to an attack on the tyranny of religion, followed by an awakening to the evils of inequalities between races, cultures, sexes, and so on, always striving to perfect the laws which, in turn, are to perfect mankind itself. It is hardly surprising to find that Pike believes that international law is the tool for shaping and controlling public opinion and, by definition, moulding the global masses (p. 22). In this sense, the passage brings to mind the Apostle Paul’s discussion of the ‘perfect law of liberty’ instituted by Christ Himself. Paul instructs us to stand fast "…in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage." (Galatians 5:1-4). Here, Paul is referring to the fact that Christ’s death frees believers from the bondage of the 636 Judaic Laws, which Christ replaced with a single commandment: that by dying to ourselves and allowing the Holy Spirit to direct our lives we should learn to love one another*. What Pike is doing is offering a ‘secular’** counterpart to this doctrine, one based on man saving himself by perfecting his own laws.

* Obedience to this single commandment fulfils the Judaic Law in full, because by definition those who allow their actions to be guided by the Holy Spirit in this way do not wish to steal, commit adultery, lie, cheat, slander, judge, and so on.

** I enclose the term secular in quotation marks because civil law, and politics for that matter, is merely a continuation of religion by other means. Just as until recently the laws of Western societies were based on Judeo-Christian values, the New World Order is to be based on the Kabbalistic values of tolerance and moral relativism. So-called ‘positive’ (i.e. enabling) laws that do away with the old legal sanctions reflect these new values and undermine Judaeo-Christian values.

Moral values as abhorrent as Christ’s Great Commandment are just one reason why Pike excoriates his brethren, urges them to recognise the necessity of Freemasonry in the battle against the evils of dogma (sic!), and calls for them to repent of their apostasy to its ‘true creed’. A quick look at the world today suggests that many did indeed ‘answer the call’ and repent of their sins against themselves and their fellow man, the only ‘deity’ they are obliged to seek forgiveness from.

In the final section of the degree Pike – finally – begins to give us an insight into the Masonic/Kabbalistic understanding of good and evil, and by definition of ‘the Deity’ himself given that we are made in His image. He starts by telling us that, in effect, the fact that most people do not think is a prerequisite for elite rule and requires only a "benign and disinterested guide" to make this a good rather than an evil. The reader should not be surprised to find that Pike explicitly refers to Freemasonry as this benign and disinterested guide and believes it is vital that "…the sound of the hammer and the clink of the trowel should be always heard in some part of the building." (p. 25).

Next, Pike eases us into a discussion of the origin of the Kaballah, the creation, and the nature of ‘being’ as a precursor to introducing the Masonic doctrine of god and evil. Kaballah, he says, is the "..tradition of the children of Seth" (p. 27) as introduced to Chaldea by Abraham, taught to the Egyptians by Joseph, rediscovered and restored by Moses, hidden in the Bible, taught by Jesus and passed to John, and encoded by the latter in Revelations, the final book of the Bible. This assertion reflects what Pike has already told us as regards the ‘hidden truths’ concealed in the Holy Books and taught by and to the Adepts in the sacred dramas of the Mystery religions, Gnosticism, Kabbalah and Freemasonry.

Next, Pike outlines the nature of ‘being’, his ideas being practically indentical to those that would later be expressed in the philosophy of Martin Heidegger, a philosophy that was itself subsequently developed by the ‘existential marxist’ Jean-Paul Sartre, a supposed atheist who made a startling death-bed confession as regards his ‘interest’ in Kabbalah. Pike tells us that Being cannot emerge from itself because it is logically impossible for Being to emerge from Nothingness. Ipso facto, there must be a God because:

"…matter cannot think, nor could it cause itself, or exist without cause, nor could nothing produce either forces or things, for in void nothingness no forces can adhere. Admit a self-existent Force and its intelligence…and at once God Is." (p. 29)

Pike then outlines the three main ‘causes’ or principles of creation as stated in the Kabbalah. First, the divine world of Azkuth, as manifested by the creative thought of the Deity and in which all was unity. Second, the world of creation, Briah, caused by the first cause and representing a passive reflection of the first creative principle. Finally, the world of formation, Yetzirah, the actual creation, itself caused by the first and second causes. Above all three is the ‘Creative Principle’ itself, the Deity known as Ain Soph, the Principle that is at one and the same time the First, Second and Third principles and thus the cause of all that represents All in All (p. 28). The reader should by now be sufficiently familiar with the dialectic to recognise that the creation itself is here regarded as a dialectical process: the creative/generative/masculine first principle (thesis) and reproductive/passive/feminine second principle (antithesis), giving birth to the synthesis of the two, the world of Formation, the universe itself.

Having enlightened us as to the ‘true’ origin of the Creation, Pike proceeds to explain our fall from perfection, telling us that the Fall is a universal legend intended to teach us that moral evil equates to falsehood in actions and words, and that injustice done or spoken is the essence of falsehood and the death of moral being (p. 29). By contrast, the solution to this moral death starts with the perception of light. Pike does not mean this in the Christian sense, with Jesus as the ‘light and life of the world’, because he has already dismissed this belief as a form of idolatry. Rather, as described above, light represents the acquisition of knowledge and truth, which are required to facilitate the soul’s journey into the afterlife (pp. 29-30). This knowledge and truth is not provided by something external to, and higher than, oneself, but by induction into, and proper instruction in, the Mysteries. Life eternal is something to be attained by discovery of the laws contained within the Creation itself, which is referred to in the second degree as the "Great Bible of God…ever open before mankind." (p. 4).

Having got this off his chest, Pike finally cuts to the chase and tells us what we must understand about the nature of good and evil:

"The true name of Satan, the Kabbalists say, is that of Yahweh reversed. For Satan is not a black god but the negation of God. The Devil is the personification of atheism and idolatry" (p. 31).

In light of his earlier comments concerning idolatry, the only conclusion it is possible to draw from this is that Pike believes Christians, those idolaters that worship the sign and ignore the signifier, to be the true Satanists! For Pike, it is Christians that deny the light (reason, knowledge and truth) and embrace the dark (faith, doctrine and falsehood). Additionally, we are to understand that God and Satan are simply two sides of the same coin, two polarities of the same Force. Thus Pike concludes that Satan is a Force created for good that nonetheless may serve evil. In human terms, Satan is an instrument of liberty and free will, represented symbolically by deities such as Pan, Lucifer (the light-bearer) and, in the Bible itself, as the serpent that goaded Adam and Eve to independence by assuring them that they would become ‘as gods’.

There are two key points to take from this, although Pike himself does not elaborate on them in this degree. The first is that Pike is telling us that God/Satan are one and the same, the one being the mirror image of the other. The second is that Pike has sketched out a dialectic comprised of good (thesis) and antithesis (evil) without enlightening us as to the synthesis. A clue is provided above in the reference to Nietzsche, and in the second degree in the context of the synthesis of male and female being neither male nor female but androgynous. Similarly, the synthesis of good and evil is neither good nor evil but, to put it in Nietzchean terms, Beyond Good and Evil or, more simply, beyond morality, in the same sense that the animal kingdom is not governed by standards of human morality but simply acts out the rules and laws of Creation.

Pike ends the third degree with the following:

"Masonry, like all the Religions, all the Mysteries, Hermeticism and Alchemy, conceals its secrets from all except the Adepts and Sages, or the Elect, and uses false explanations and misinterpretations of its symbols to mislead those who deserve only to be misled; to conceal the Truth, which it calls Light, from them, and to draw them away from it. Truth is not for those who are unworthy or unable to receive it, or would pervert it" (p. 32).

One can only wonder how many ardent defenders of the Brotherhood are truly aware of the wool they have pulled over their own eyes.

Morals and Dogma of Freemasonry: An Analysis (2 of 32)

2007-11-17T19:04:00.000Z

An Analysis of Albert Pike's Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry

Part Two: Fellow-Craft

Introduction

Pike’s outline of the second degree of Blue Lodge or Craft Masonry, called Fellow-Craft, picks up where the first degree leaves off and continues to develop the candidate’s understanding of the State, liberty, equality, and law and order. Ostensibly, the purpose of this degree is to tutor the initiate in the ways of REASON, FAITH and LOVE, although the reader will note that Pike devotes very little time to a discussion of these values. Almost all of the text is devoted to an historical analysis of the evils of all forms of government other than the form desired by Pike himself, and were it not for the context in which he writes we could easily regard this as a work of political philosophy.

When reading the second degree one is reminded of Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness* and the ideological world-view of the madman Kurtz as described by the narrator, Marlow: "It gave me the notion of an exotic Immensity ruled by an august Benevolence". Pike’s prose rises and soars and it is very easy to be swept away and made dizzy by the heights of his rhetoric and his self-presentation as an ardent and committed defender of liberty and equality. Allow oneself to be beguiled by this and one quickly forgets the ‘illumination’ provided by the first degree, where we’re told that the people are just a disorganised rabble to be moulded into perfection by the great and noble truths of Freemasonry.

If we keep these lessons in mind and analyse the second degree dispassionately, however, it is soon revealed as a utopian mishmash of Rousseau’s totalitarian democracy and Plato’s Republic of ‘Philosopher Kings’. Just as Kurtz’s fevered ravings and delusions of grandeur dissolve to provide a brief moment of clarity ("The horror! The horror!") before his death, so Pike’s ideal State reveals itself as one in which the GENIUS of the individual that ‘knows best’ is recognised by all. If needs be, by the said GENIUS seizing the reigns and impressing on the masses his superiority and fitness to rule. Yet Pike also states his desire for us all to be ‘kings’ in some sort of prototype People’s Democracy, in which we all agree to submit to the general law enacted by all and for all.

Those familiar with Rousseau’s most influential work, On the Social Contract, will be only too aware of the fate that lies in store for those that refuse to accept the law enacted by all and for all. The individual that acts on the basis of his ‘subjective whim’** and refuses to recognise the ‘truth’ of the General Will is to be "forced to be free". He is to be made to see the error of his ways. He is to be brought into the light. If he still refuses he is to be freed from the bonds of his error in the only way possible: by a bullet to the back of his head. Rousseau’s doctrine is that of the Vietnam War: "In order to save this village we had to destroy it". It is telling, therefore, that Pike states approvingly that Rousseau’s words will ring out in revolutions and uprisings throughout the ages.

To put it in a modern context, Pike’s rhetoric is intended for those that regard John Lennon’s Imagine as a wonderful idea but fail to appreciate just how oppressive are the steps required to realise the goal, not to mention the goal itself. Pike’s apparent idealism is a mask to hide the underlying elitist assumptions: man is fit only to be led by the nose by the ‘wise’; man must be provided with a political system that provides the illusion of freedom; the political system best suited to man is one that crushes dissent and individualism under the weight of popular opinion and ‘democratic’ principles.

Finally, when reading the below bear in mind my central thesis:

that Freemasonry represents the religious and philosophical foundations for a fundamental re-structuring - a revolution if you prefer - of human social relationships and society itself, and

that much of what we see happening around us – the radical social transformation of the last forty years – is a direct reflection of this fundamental re-structuring in line with Masonic principles

THIS ANALYSIS IS REFERENCED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MS WORD/RTF FORMAT SECOND PART OF MORALS AND DOGMA ACCESSIBLE BY FOLLOWING THIS LINK.

* Hegel’s words in a quote that can be found in my analysis of the first degree.

** Conrad’s novella is set in Africa during the worst period of Imperialist excess. It describes the fate of an idealist, an ‘emissary of light’, sent into the darkness of the African interior. Once there, the idealist, Kurtz, finds himself bereft of the authorities, social structures, rules, and laws that keep his appetites in check, and adopts the only law available: the law of the jungle. He writes a pamphlet, a Great Work outlining how the savages can be tamed and civilised, while simultaneously acting as God to one of the local tribes, performing ‘unspeakable rites’ and arbitrary acts of cruelty and bloodlust.

The narrator, Marlow, is sent to bring Kurtz back to the civilised world, and finds him suffering from malaria and close to death. Only at the moment of his demise does Kurtz allow himself to acknowledge the heart of darkness within himself, hence his final words: "The horror! The horror!" Later, Marlow discovers that Kurtz had allowed himself another moment of honesty during his feverish battle with malaria: he finds the words "Exterminate all the brutes!" written across one of the pages of Kurtz’s ‘Great Work’.

Heart of Darkness is a very sharp and relevant reminder of what happens when man thinks he can stand alone and has no need to draw upon anything or anyone greater than himself. It provided the basis for Francis Ford Coppola’s film Apocalypse Now.

2nd Degree: Fellow-Craft

Pike begins by informing us that the ‘popular’ religions of the masses – the established faiths – are primitive forms of the truth, shells stripped of their kernels for the easy digestion of those not fit to receive enlightenment. The popular religions take literally what is meant to be interpreted allegorically and symbolically, and accept the form in which these hidden truths are provided as the truth itself (p. 2).

Those fit to receive the truth are taught it in Mysteries, predicated on proper interpretation of the symbols and allegories that the Profane take so literally. Pike claims that Masonry is identical to the ancient Mystery religions and still uses the ancient methods of teaching and instruction: rites, exhibitions, symbols and performances (p. 2).

Pike tells us that Freemasonry rests on foundations constructed by the Etruscans and Romans, and thus by implication the Greeks, Egyptians and Persians. This admixture of pantheons and philosophies is a perfect reflection of Kabbalah, which is a synthesis of all the above with Judaic beliefs serving as the glue that binds them together (pp. 2-3).

We are then told that Christianity, to add to its flaws, taught its adherents FRATERNITY but not EQUALITY, by teaching a doctrine that required submission to established authority rather than opposition to it. For Pike, Christianity stands opposed to a modern ‘truth’: "…that Man is supreme over institutions, and not they over him." The logical consequence of this is that man owes it to himself to be free and oppose "…spiritual and temporal despotisms." In this context, Pike declares that Masonry "…early comprehended this truth, and recognised its own enlarged duties." (p. 3)

Even at this early point we can already detect two core themes. First, that Freemasonry is the guardian of a truth denied to those - the vast majority - neither ready nor capable to receive it. Second, that the Craft has a religious, social and political duty to feed bite-sized chunks of the ‘truth’ to those incapable of digesting it in one sitting. This is as applicable to the path taken by the initiate as it is to members of the ‘common herd’: those willing and able to receive the ‘truth’ will progress through the 32 degrees of Freemasonry, which are identical to the 32 Paths of Wisdom of the Kabbalah. Others will be content with the wisdom conferred by the Blue Lodge degrees. Pike’s attitude towards these lower brethren is revealed later in the text.

In line with the above, Pike likens those that assist with the development and/or communication of a truth to Moses and Jesus and informs us that "…to set forth and develop a truth…is to make greater the spiritual glory of the race." (p. 4). In this context the reference to Moses and Jesus is intelligible only if we remember that the God of Kabbalah is unknowable and uncommunicative. Accordingly, the Law and the Great Commandment was not handed down by God but by mere men. The pursuit of truth, therefore, represents ‘the Deity’ - mankind - gaining greater knowledge of itself and its environment, and basking in its own glory and magnificence.

Moving on to the subject of philosophy and science, and casting yet more light on the ‘secular’ nature of both, Pike regards the former as the inspiration of a religious sentiment based on a search for ‘truth’ rather than a fixed creed or doctrine. The latter, science, is harnessed to this objective as the means by which to read the signs of the Creation, signs that represent the "…first scriptures for the human race" and the "Great Bible of God…ever open before mankind." (p. 4). In other words, the ‘truths’ provided by philosophy and science provide the knowledge and wisdom required for Divine Man to realise his own salvation and rejoin with the divine.

Pike proceeds to explain that these great ‘truths’ are taught to its initiates, so that they gain a proper understanding of their rights, interests and duties. The latter are moral and political in nature: "If Masonry needed to be justified for imposing political and moral duties on its initiates, it would be enough to point to the sad history of the world" (p. 5). One cannot help but agree that the history of the world is indeed sad, but this does not alter the fact that Masonry has taken upon itself to correct the world and remodel it in accordance with its own 'truths'. This is to replace many competing dogmas with one single dogma. The clear-minded will recognise that such an endeavour is far more likely to continue the sad history of the world than break with it.

The next quote serves to confirm the religious nature of Freemasonry and explain the meaning of the title of this degree. Pike states that:

"The true Mason is he who labours strenuously to help his Order effect its great purposes. Not that the Order can effect them by itself, but that it, too, can help. It also is one of God’s instruments. It is a force and a power; and shame upon it, if it did not exert itself, and, if need be, sacrifice its children in the cause of humanity." (p. 5).

So, the ‘true’ Mason (just like the ‘true’ Christian and Muslim) is he that is most fanatically committed to the doctrine of his faith. Yet because the dogma of Freemasonry is so all-encompassing (provided one does not tread on the toes of their ‘true’ understanding of the nature of God) Masons are perfectly prepared to support fellow-travellers that share Freemasonry’s aims. This is the meaning of the admission that the Order cannot effect its great purposes unaided, and the reference to the Fellow-Craft found in the first degree in the context of the Perfect ASHLAR: "…a stone made ready by the hands of the workmen, adjusted by the working-tools of the Fellow-Craft" (p. 4). Pike elaborates on this relationship between the ‘sacred’ and ‘profane’ later in the degree.

Pike then reveals the hopeless utopianism of the Masonic vision, as expressed in his longing for the time when "…nations will gravitate about the Truth, like stars about the light, each in its own orbit, without clashing or collision; and everywhere freedom, tinctured with stars, crowned with the celestial splendour, and with wisdom and justice on either hand, will reign supreme." (p. 5). Such a world would be fit for the Gods, but is not meant for man. The steps required to shoehorn mankind into the state of uniformity required to achieve harmony of this order would be as draconian and oppressive as anything the world has seen thus far, and quite probably a good deal worse. Christians, of course, share a similar vision of the future, the exception being that they recognise the futility and hubris of the belief that man can create his own earthly paradise, and wait patiently for God to return in human form and usher in its spiritual counterpart.

In this context, it does not seem unreasonable to argue that the steps required to realise this goal are the very steps we are taking today, as expressed in the new ‘virtues’ of tolerance, solidarity and the ‘brotherhood of man’ so beloved of the United Nations. These are the legal requirements of the New World Order. Unsurprisingly, Pike proceeds to exhort us to mix REASON with LOVE and FAITH and informs us that the latter two accompany REASON and are necessary to avoid fanaticism, intolerance and persecution (pp. 6-7). Of course, what’s good for the goose is also good for the gander and it is important to note the increasing levels of intolerance shown towards those who value the doctrines and moral standards of their own religious convictions, rather than those of the ‘brethren’. This serves to demonstrate that the imposition of ‘truth’ is simply the replacement of existing dogmas with a single overarching dogma to which we must all submit.

Next, Pike offer us his view of the importance of the GENIUS, the great intellectual or Philosopher King. In what amounts to a veiled precursor of the Führerprinzip or ‘leadership principle’ Pike tells us that:

"…it is GENIUS that gets power, and its prime lieutenants are FORCE and WISDOM. The unruliest of men bend before the leader that has the sense to see and the will to do. It is GENIUS that rules with God-like Power." (p. 8).

In the next paragraph, he explains that the intellectual level of the people is to be raised - by teaching them ‘loving-kindness’ and ‘wisdom’ - to ensure that they elect the GENIUS and set him in his proper place at the head of the State. Presumably, by prostrating themselves before the GENIUS’ great intellect in this way the people will prove Pike’s contention that the "…mastery of mind over mind is the only conquest worth having." (p. 8). Thus will the people submit to what Pike refers to as "…just Imperial rule." (p. 9).

Having lauded the virtues of the Great Leader, Pike then contradicts himself in his definition of free government based on the "free popular power", which requires that "…all must be kings". Pike tells us that such a government must be comprised of a population trained to think and act for itself, for the people must be ever vigilant if their liberty is not to be snatched away from them (p. 10). However, he suddenly and inexplicably abandons the subject, returning to it later in the text, and switches to an explanation of some of the instruments of Freemasonry.

Pike introduces the Scale and Compass and defines them in literal terms as tools to perform geometrical and trigometrical calculations, making the point that neither is mutually exclusive*. In the final analysis, however, both are used in the art of triangulation and are symbolic of what Pike refers to as the:

"…triangle still more vast, its base extending either way from us, with and past the horizon into immensity, and its apex infinitely distant above us; to which corresponds a similar infinite triangle below--what is above equalling what is below, immensity equalling immensity…." (p. 11).

This is a linguistic representation of the two interlocked triangles of the Star of David, representing the union of male and female and the reconciliation of opposites.

* In the first degree we were told that although the square and compasses are generally used for different purposes, and symbolise the earthly and the spiritual realms respectively, certain earthly measurements, such as those of plane geometry, require the use of both. This synthesis represents the intermixing of the earthly with the divine: As Above So Below.

Here, we can refer back to the teachings of the first degree and remember that the Blazing Star of Horus represents the very same union. Horus is the offspring, the dialectical synthesis, of Osiris and Isis and thus represents the union of the male and female elements. This is relevant because, according to the Kabbalah, original man, the spiritual man that existed prior to the Fall from the Garden of Eden, was androgynous: the male and female elements were united in one personality. So, remembering that Genesis tells us that man is made in God’s image, the conclusion is that God also is male and female, an androgyn just like the original man.

Reconnecting with the Divine requires man not only to place himself in God’s shoes by determining what will result in his own salvation but also to reconcile the male and female right here in the material world. Feminism is the means by which this reconciliation is to be achieved: the emasculation of the male in direct proportion to the re-masculation of the female. This need for harmony and balance between the sexes is regarded as so important because division and inequality between male and female is seen as the product of the original sin, the punishment for which was banishment to the material world - earth – and the separation of the androgyn into distinct sexes. Imbalance between the sexes thus stands in the way of mankind’s bid to achieve divine status and reconnect with the divine. The male and female must be unified for this to happen.

The focus on duality is maintained in Pike’s attitude towards the individual and the body-politic: "Masonry is a march and a struggle toward the Light. For the individual as well as the nation, Light is Virtue, Manliness, Intelligence, Liberty. Tyranny over the soul or body, is darkness." (p. 9). The problem with accepting this at face value is that it stands at odds with the dialectical process that Pike, Freemasonry, and the Kabbalah are committed to. Just as God is believed to be male and female He is also light and dark and good and evil. More accurately, He is neither light or dark, nor male or female, nor good or evil but a synthesis of the opposites, just as the hermaphrodite cannot be categorised either way. Pike is clearly hiding something, because thus far he has focused on the reconciliation of opposites, whereas here he merely delineates the duality and leaves the rest unspoken. He does, however, give the game away in a very startling passage later in the text…

To return to a theme introduced earlier, Pike then proceeds to a discussion of faith and works and roundly rejects the terms of salvation offered by the Apostle Paul, i.e. that we are saved by grace through faith. This is relevant because in the Christian tradition the idea that God offers salvation freely to those who believe and have faith is of paramount importance: it assures us that we cannot save ourselves through our own efforts or good works. We cannot determine for ourselves what will result in our own salvation. Rejecting this view, Pike adopts a position similar to that of the Apostle James. Just as James tells us that ‘faith without works is dead’ Pike states that:

"There are men who dialectically are Christians, as there are a multitude who dialectically are Muslims, and yet are ethically Infidels, as these are ethically of the Profane in the strictest sense:--intellectual believers, but practical atheists." (p.11)

And on the other hand:

"…there are many dialectical skeptics, but ethical believers, as there are many Masons who have never undergone initiation; and as ethics are the end and purpose of religion, so are ethical believers the most worthy." (p. 11)

This last passage refers to fellow-travellers - Masons in all but name - who share the philosophy of the Craft and with whom Masons are more than happy to do business if it serves their interests and advances their goals.

Returning to another theme introduced at the very start of the degree, Pike tells us that people prefer ‘truths’ suited to their palate and ability to comprehend, and which best suit their frame of reference and prejudices, rather than the ‘truth’ per se. Pike’s conclusion is that the masses will find the ‘highest truth’ unacceptable. Accordingly, they should be provided with whatever version of the ‘truth’ they are capable of receiving. As to what this ‘higher truth’ actually is, we are told that "…all truths are truths of period, and not truths for eternity" (p. 12). Pike identifies this as THE truth, and as I have stated elsewhere this ‘truth’ is somehow immune to its own logic and is true for all time and in all circumstances.

This ‘truth’ is the fundamental dogma of Freemasonry: we must all accept that there is no truth, no absolutes, and no fixed standards. It forms the backbone of the ‘secular’ doctrines of relativism, which is fast becoming the default position of the majority, and tolerance. It is for this reason that Freemasonry is concerned with the ‘promulgation of positive laws’ as Pike puts it in the first degree. This is a reference to the difference between the negative (i.e. proscribing) and positive (i.e. enabling) laws of the Old Testament and the Torah. Negative laws stand in the way of relativism and tolerance because they reflect fixed moral standards and absolutes. They must, therefore, be attacked, undermined, and done away with.

In this way taboos and actions formerly regarded as scandalous and shameful - ultimately because they contribute to the destruction of the social fabric of society - are normalised. The result is social disintegration, which is the whole point of the exercise because these secular manifestations of Freemasonry and the Kabbalah are nothing more than tools to effect revolution by evolutionary means. If they undermine our culture, religion and political system it is precisely because the whole point of revolution IS to undermine a society’s culture, religion and political system, in order to impose a new order. One either attempts to do this in one fell-swoop after the fashion of Brother Number One, Pol Pot, or by the subtler, more insidious, and less noticeable method of infiltration and subversion.

Just as Pike regards the masses as too dull to appreciate the truths of Freemasonry, so too are the lower orders of the Craft unworthy to bask in the radiance of the Masonic light. At the beginning of the degree he informs us that the established religions are shells stripped of their kernels of truth, which is all the masses are fit to receive. The same applies to Freemasonry itself: "The popular explanations of the symbols of Masonry are fitting for the multitude that have swarmed into the Temples" (p. 13). The multitude, content with the explanations offered by the Blue Lodge degrees, are no more aware of the true nature of Freemasonry than the Catholic who does not know that his faith’s Mother of God, Mary, is in fact Isis, and her offspring, Horus.

Irrespective of one’s status as either ‘sacred’ or ‘profane’ Pike’s sanctimonious attitude towards those who are unready to receive the truth and content with mere shadows is that they are to be pitied rather than persecuted (p. 13). In a similar vein, Pike bemoans the difficulties of leading men to the ‘truth’ and teaching them to think ‘aright’ (pp. 13-14). Having done so, he then proceeds to warn the Fellow-Craft of the dangers of pride and conceit! They are to be humble as they mould the masses in the image of the ‘true’ faith.

The above is reflected in Pike’s attitude towards education, which should be a process of "…burning our moral and intellectual idols: our prejudices, notions, conceits, our worthless or ignoble purposes." (p. 15). A little later, he tells us that the teaching of equality should also form the backbone of education (p. 18). Needless to say, Pike is not exactly coy about what our prejudices, notions and conceits amount to; they are moral and intellectual ‘idols’, the false Gods of the Infidel. As to those who wholeheartedly submit themselves to this Masonic education, Pike tells us that they fall into "…unfathomable ecstasies in view of all the decompositions of forces resulting in unity. All works for all. Destruction is not annihilation but renewal." (pp. 15-16).

A Masonic ‘education’ amounts to little more than brainwashing. This is made plain a little later in his formula for determining ‘truth’: affirmation, negation, and discussion followed by solution (p. 18). Pike’s method is the dialectic, which has its modern-day equivalent in the so-called Delphi Technique of facilitated consensus-based decision-making. These techniques are very often used as part of a cynical and deliberate attempt to steer a group towards a pre-determined outcome, usually by employing a skilled facilitator to discredit opposition and limit the discussion to an equally pre-determined set of topics. The group is thus led to an outcome that it believes it has arrived at of its own volition.

In essence, Pike would have us believe that everything is dialectic, interconnected, networked and contingent, subject to a kind of social butterfly effect. Elements and principles are intertwined to such an extent "..as to bring the material and the moral world into the same light" (p. 16). This is best expressed in the Masonic watchword of the 33rd degree: Ordo Ab Chao or Order From Chaos. The fertility god Osiris dies in the winter only to rise in the spring and bring life to the Nile Delta. Destruction leads to renewal. Destruction is necessary for renewal. We see this very idea expressed a little later in Pike’s discussion of the necessity of war.

Politically, Pike’s theory of the State is based on a social contract, but as we shall see his understanding is that of the proto-Marxist Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Pike’s theory rests on the sovereignty of man (liberty), relinquishment of natural rights in order to form the State (equality) and the common protection afforded by the State (fraternity). The alert will notice that Pike has set these three principles in a Masonic triangle, which tells us that Pike believes they exist dialectically. More specifically, liberty and equality stand opposed to one another as contradictory forces. They cannot exist harmoniously. One cannot be free to pursue one’s aims and objectives and at the same time be equal with those one’s pursuit of liberty impinges upon. By placing the two head-to-head Pike arrives at a synthesis or reconciliation of the opposites: fraternity or ‘brotherhood’. For Pike, brotherhood is clearly something to be imposed by the State itself.

What Pike is offering is a reformulation of Rousseau’s understanding of the social contract, which requires:

"…the total alienation of each associate, together with all of his rights, to the entire community. For first of all, since each person gives himself whole and entire, the condition is equal for everyone; and since the condition is equal for everyone, no one has an interest in making it burdensome for others."
---On The Social Contract

Rousseau explains that:

"Each of us places his person and all his power in common under the supreme direction of the General Will; and as one we receive each member as an indivisible part of the whole"
---On The Social Contract

This sounds wonderful until one appreciates that Rousseau believes that his General Will is infallible – literally incapable of error. Armed with the ‘truth’, the General Will approaches the individual who dares to deny it in the following manner:

"…whoever refuses to obey the General Will will be forced to do so by the entire body. This means merely that he will be forced to be free."
---On The Social Contract

Next, Pike returns to a subject introduced earlier: the GENIUS of the individual and its role and function vis-a-vis the State and the people. It is worth quoting Pike at length on this matter, as it is clear that for all his talk of liberty, equality, fraternity and elevating the intellectual level of the people so that ‘all are kings’, Pike yearns for a Platonic Republic ruled by the wise philosopher-king:

"It is quite true that republics only occasionally, and as it were accidentally, select their wisest, or even the less incapable among the incapables, to govern them and legislate for them. If genius, armed with learning and knowledge, will grasp the reins, the people will reverence it; if it only modestly offers itself for office, it will be smitten on the face, even when, in the straits of distress and the agonies of calamity, it is indispensable to the salvation of the State. Put it upon the track with the showy and superficial, the conceited, the ignorant, and impudent, the trickster and charlatan, and the result shall not be a moment doubtful. The verdicts of Legislatures and the People are like the verdicts of juries,--sometimes right by accident." (p. 19)

Or, as Rousseau puts it:

"How will a blind multitude, which often does not know what it wants (since it rarely knows what is good for it), carry out on its own an enterprise as great and as difficult as a system of legislation? […] It must be made to see to see object as they are…[t]he good path it seeks must be pointed out to it."
---On The Social Contract

Genius, then, must ‘grasp the reigns’ and not wait for the common man to recognise and acknowledge his fitness to rule. The genius must cross the thresholds of established authorities and jurisdictions and seize for himself what the people would deny him. Only then will the masses acknowledge and reference his leadership. Indeed, on the very next page Pike informs us of our duty to recognise and defer to those who reveal and distinguish themselves in this manner! (p. 20)

Those familiar with my understanding of the organisation Common Purpose, which clearly has Masonic roots, will no doubt recognise this perspective in the rhetoric of its Chief Executive, Julia Middleton, whose book Leading Beyond Authority is based on this very principle and provides the organisation’s ethos. The leader is not to wait for authority and legitimacy to act but to seize the moment. The leader should be his own authority and create his own legitimacy. As all the signs point to Middleton being a dues-paying member of the Masonic sorority Order of the Eastern Star, this ‘Heroine of Jericho’ has probably received a medal for outstanding service to the cause of Masonic subversion: her 'training programme' is now being taught to civil servants and business leaders world-wide.

I have chosen to omit the next two pages, twenty-one and twenty-two. They represent fine examples of Pike’s rhetoric, the purpose of which seems to be to elevate the reader, and convince him of the virtues and nobility of the Craft, to such an extent that he overlooks what follows, this being the return to Pike’s advocacy of Rousseau’s totalitarian democracy. On this subject, Pike tells us that:

"The citizen who cannot accomplish well the smaller purposes of public life, cannot
compass the larger. The vast power of endurance, forbearance, patience, and
performance, of a free people, is acquired only by continual exercise of all the functions, like the healthful physical human vigor. If the individual citizens have it not, the State must equally be without it. It is of the essence of a free government, that the people should not only be concerned in making the laws, but also in their execution. No man ought to be more ready to obey and administer the law than he who has helped to make it. The business of government is carried on for the benefit of all, and every co-partner should give counsel and cooperation." (p. 23)

Here Pike is simply paraphrasing the words of Rousseau himself in his famous work On the Social Contract. Before quoting Rousseau, however, it is important to understand what is meant by the term ‘General Will’. For Rousseau, it is the answer to the problem of how men can be united together yet retain their freedom and right to obey only themselves. This impossibility is ‘achieved’ by uniting the people in a sovereign power that consists of the sum total of the force of all the people combined. This requires every member of the sovereign power to surrender all his rights and power to the sovereign. In so doing, Rousseau argues, no one is required to surrender what another is not required to surrender because everyone surrenders everything to all (On The Social Contract).

The General Will, then, represents the sovereign power acting on the assumption that no one member will wish to impose a law on others that he is not willing to impose on himself. Thus Rousseau concludes that: "…obedience to the law one has prescribed for oneself is liberty." The logical consequence of this is that "…only the General Will can direct the forces of the state according to the purpose which it is was instituted, which is the common good". This is why those who deny the infallibility of the General Will are to be ‘forced to be free’: Rousseau believes that those who do so are acting against the principle that "..obedience to the law one has prescribed for oneself is liberty". They have made themselves slaves of their own private and subjective wills and must be corrected.

The reader does not need me to point out that the very opposite is the case: Rousseau’s philosophy is the epitome of the democratic ‘tyranny of the majority’. It is also the direct precursor of the Marxist doctrine of ‘false consciousness’, the idea that the masses exist in a state of mental slavery because they are incapable of seeing the untruths and distortions of their beliefs and ideas.

Yet in all this it is important to recognise that Rousseau’s doctrine is also perfectly compatible – and in fact identical – with Pike’s apparently contradictory advocacy of rule by the ‘philosopher-king’ in a political system where ‘all are kings’. In Rousseau’s philosophy all are kings by virtue of being indivisible parts of the sovereign power and thus framers and followers of their own laws. Yet at one and the same time Rousseau believes that the people are incapable of governing themselves and of understanding in what direction the General Will is pointing them.

So, although a society of this type is to be governed by the absolute and infallible general will of the sovereign (representing the people themselves) Rousseau believes that it is both possible and desirable for the general will to be determined by ‘enlightened’ leaders. The people, therefore, must be content to be dazzled by the brilliance of their leaders’ insights and acknowledge that their leaders’ subjective wills – their opinions and ideas as regards what is the best direction and course of action to take - accurately reflect the people’s own general will.

Thus Rousseau concludes that the best form of government is an elected aristocracy, on the grounds that:

"…it is the best and most natural order for the wisest to govern the multitude…"
---On The Social Contract

Pike’s position is that: "Voltaire, Condorcet, and Rousseau uttered words that will ring, in change and revolutions, throughout all the ages." (p. 17) Unsurprisingly, both Voltaire and Condorcet shared a political philosophy identical to that of Pike and Rousseau. Equally unsurprisingly, all were Freemasons. As an aside, the reader may find it ‘enlightening’ to examine Rousseau’s position on religion. Not only did Rousseau detest Christianity (on the grounds that it constituted a spiritual allegiance that lessened the individual’s loyalty to the State), he also advocated replacing it with a secular religion designed for the purpose of binding the people together and cementing their allegiance to the State.

The point here is not whether one finds the idea of abolishing Christianity distasteful. Rather, the point is that the Masonic God is man himself, and like all deities he is a jealous god that can tolerate no opposition from ‘false idols’. The State is the means by which to perfect mankind and man’s allegiance, therefore, must be to the State and the State alone. Just as a people’s laws and social conventions reflect its religious beliefs so too does the form and function of a State reflect the national religion. Viewed from this perspective, we can see the New World Order for what it is: an attempt to build on a global scale new social and political institutions suited to the religious beliefs of the Kabbalah and its Western manifestation, Freemasonry.

Moving on to another subject touched on earlier, Pike embarks on a lengthy discussion on the relative merits of words and action (pp. 24-6), first lauding the man of action before reversing his position and informing us that "The world is conquered by the head even more than by the hands" (p. 27). He then reminds us that the SWORD symbolises both the spoken and written word and warfare, and in this vein offers the following startling insight:

"Wars, like thunder-storms, are often necessary to purify the stagnant atmosphere. War is not a demon, without remorse or reward. It restores the brotherhood in letters of fire. When men are seated in their pleasant places, sunken in ease and indolence, with Pretence and Incapacity and Littleness usurping all the high places of State, war is the baptism of blood and fire, by which alone they can be renovated. It is the hurricane that brings the elemental equilibrium, the concord of Power and Wisdom. So long as these continue obstinately divorced, it will continue to chasten." (p. 27)

Whereas earlier Pike was content merely to delineate the duality of good and evil and light and darkness without taking the next logical step, here he associates war itself with the process of destruction and renewal. In other words, war itself, the most repulsive and destructive human act, is a dialectical process necessary to achieve the ‘elemental equilibrium’ and ‘concord of Power and Wisdom’. It is the means by which opposites can be reconciled not only in relation to individual peace agreements between warring factions but in the more general and universal sense of bringing humanity itself ‘into the light’. Evil can thus be good and good evil, just as the Masonic God is neither good nor evil but a synthesis of the two in harmony with one another.

Needless to say, the most important and interesting aspect of the above quote is that it is a functional description of war. Pike describes war as a means to achieve political, moral and religious aims rather than war as a necessary evil arising from irreconcilable differences or hostile aggression. This is nothing short of a doctrine of war for the purposes of replacing the ‘old order’, with its ‘stagnant atmosphere’ that does not foster the development of a sense of ‘brotherhood’, and instituting a new one. Such a war is not the war of the Statesman. It is the war of the revolutionary.

Pike ends the degree here, adding only an outline of some of the numbers sacred to Masonry. Those familiar with the Kabbalah will understand why these numbers are also significant to the Mason. The numbers are as follows: 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 12.

Morals and Dogma of Freemasonry: An Analysis (1 of 32)

2007-11-13T19:45:00.000Z

An Analysis of Albert Pike's Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry

Part One: The Apprentice

Introduction

Before discussing Pike's description and analysis of the first degree it is important to provide an outline of Freemasonry in general and deal with some of the sleights of hand performed by ardent defenders of the Brotherhood.

In the first instance, note that although Masons living in the same area will all attend one Temple many different Lodges operate within the same physical structure. This reflects the compartmentalisation of Freemasonry: the first four degrees are conferred by the Blue or Craft Lodge, the next eleven (4-14) by a Lodge of Perfection, the next four (15-18) by a Chapter of Rose Croix, the next twelve (19-30) by a Council of Kadosh and the remaining two (31-32) by a Consistory. The highest degree, the 33rd, is conferred by a Court of Honour for services rendered to the Craft.

Members of these different bodies will all meet at the same location but hold meetings on different days. One's right to attend the higher level meetings is determined by the level of degree one holds. This is why it is common for so-called Blue Lodge Masons (those who have received only the first three degrees) to be surprised by the number of 'new' faces they see when attending a ceremony conferring them with one of the higher degrees.

Accordingly, a Master Mason of a Lodge of Perfection may be entirely unaware that those at the higher levels are permitted to indulge in the kind of debate denied to the lower levels, and tell you in all innocence that Masons do not discuss political or religious matters. When a critic alleges otherwise someone at the higher level will lie through his teeth and deny it. Those at the lower levels will nod their heads in agreement because this is what they 'know' to be true.

Second, it is common for Masons to distance themselves from Pike, even though Morals and Dogma was until 1974 a standard text given to those who attain the 15th degree and its successor, Hutchen's A Bridge to Light, does not in any way reverse Pike's position. That most Masons have not read Pike is a fact that is often used to undermine the position of Freemasonry's critics. In fact, this apparent incongruity serves to bolster the critic's position, because Pike's work is full of references to meanings and significances that are kept hidden from the lower orders.

Accordingly, members of a Lodge of Perfection do not operate on the basis of 'full disclosure' and will, as they are extolled to do, seek to pursue the aims of Freemasonry, and bring their actions and morals into line with its teachings and precepts, without fully understanding its true nature.

Third, Freemasonry is, within the confines of its own borders, open and egalitarian. One's status in the non-Masonic world has no bearing on one's status in Freemasonry. A company director and staff-level employee may both work for the same organisation but the status differential between the two does not transfer to the Masonic world. On joining the Craft the company director may be startled to find that the Worshipful Master to whom he must pay obeisance is none other than his subordinate in the non-Masonic world!

Additionally, note that once one has received the three degrees and attained Master Mason status the conferral of any of the other degrees does not involve the conferral of a new or superior title as such. One is always a Master Mason, and any other title is either symbolic or a reflection of one's advancement in the organisational hierarchy. This is, however, a purely theoretical distinction: in the Soviet Union* every citizen was a 'comrade' but not all 'comrades' were members of the Politburo!

*Those that read on will find that it is no accident I have chosen to use the Soviet Union as a reference point to understand the organisational structure of Freemasonry.

Fourth, just as one's status in Freemasonry does not reflect one's standing in society, there is, in theory at least, no limit to the level one can rise to within it. Attaining a higher degree or being permitted into the organisational hierarchy is by merit and merit alone and reflects one's willingness to learn, absorb, act upon, and further the interests of, the Brotherhood. One 'receives the light' in direct proportion to the amount of effort one is able or willing to make. This ensures that only those that demonstrate a whole-hearted commitment to, and ability to understand, Freemasonry enter the higher levels and become what Pike calls 'the Adepts'.

By these means is the purity and unity of the Craft maintained: those at the top are so by merit. Sucking up to the Worshipful Master will not result in promotion, whereas 'brown-nosing' in the non-Masonic world very often does.

As per the above, when reading Morals and Dogma bear in mind that Pike's work offers an explanation of the degrees that is not made available to those at the lower levels. What Pike tells us about these degrees is not necessarily the same as the understanding offered to their recipients.

Finally, when reading the below bear in mind my central thesis:

that Freemasonry represents the religious and philosophical foundations for a fundamental re-structuring - a revolution if you prefer - of human social relationships and society itself, and

that much of what we see happening around us – the radical social transformation of the last forty years – is a direct reflection of this fundamental re-structuring in line with Masonic principles.

THIS ANALYSIS IS REFERENCED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MS WORD FORMAT FIRST PART OF MORALS AND DOGMA ACCESSIBLE BY FOLLOWING THIS LINK.

1st Degree: Entered Apprentice

Pike's outline of the first degree is a basic introduction to the philosophy of Freemasonry, much of which centres on Freemasonry's conceptualisation of the State, the masses, law and order, and human rights. This in itself is interesting because, on joining the Craft, Masons are told that they must not discuss religion or politics, the two topics most likely to disrupt the ‘harmony’ of the Lodge*. The most striking aspect of this introduction is the prevalence of Hegelian and Marxist ideas about the purpose and function of the State and the role Masons ought to play in shaping it.

* Little wonder, then, that this work was given only to those who attained the 15th degree.

Pike begins by informing us that the blind FORCE of the masses needs to be regulated and managed by the intellect, thus giving the FORCE a brain and a law. Although Pike does not say so explicitly, it is clear that the brain and law representing this guiding intellect is to be that of Freemasonry and its ideals, and functions to attack and undermine existing 'superstitions', 'prejudices' and 'despotisms' (pp. 2-3).

They [the people] have the brute FORCE of the HAMMER, but their blows help on the great cause, when struck within the lines traced by the RULE held by wisdom and discretion. (p. 3)

Again, it is clear that the wisdom and discretion referred to above is that of Freemasonry and its fellow travellers, and the RULE the ideals, precepts and philosophy of the Craft working behind the scenes to guide and direct the popular will in the desired direction.

This places Freemasonry is a role identical to that of Lenin's 'revolutionary vanguard', an elite cadre of professional revolutionaries whose sole purpose was to:

inject themselves into existing organisations in an attempt to subvert and reorient them in accordance with Marxist-Leninist principles, and

educate the masses so as to replace their 'false consciousness' with Marxist-Leninist 'truths'

Strangely, the structure Lenin envisioned for the vanguard is also identical to the egalitarian structure of Freemasonry as described in the Introduction: entry to, and progression within, the elite was to be open to all who could demonstrate the knowledge, ability and commitment required to further the revolutionary cause. The aim of Lenin’s vanguard was to turn amateur revolutionaries into professional revolutionaries. Members were to be those who "…accept the Party programme and render the Party all possible support". Advancement within it was to be determined on a meritocratic basis or, as Lenin prefers it "…a mechanism which produces what in biology is called the "survival of the fittest"

Lenin believed that the vanguard would serve to advance the cause of the Party while simultaneously protecting it from external interference and subversion. Members would rise through the ranks on the basis of their ability and commitment, just as the Mason does today. The Party’s doctrine would retain its purity because those at the top, those responsible for giving it direction and purpose, would be its most committed and dedicated adherents.

Common Purpose as an organisation exists for the purpose described above: it identifies ‘leaders’ with the required level of enthusiasm and correct ‘attitude’ and seeks to refine the raw material; to turn the amateur into a professional. This is why breaking down ‘prejudices’ is an integral part of their ‘training’ programme: the candidate’s existing beliefs must be discredited if he or she is to fully accept the organisation's underlying religious and philosophical dogmas. It is for this reason that this cash-strapped ‘charity’ vets its prospective ‘graduates’ (an interesting term…) and rejects those with beliefs and attitudes that do not fit the profile.

Pike proceeds to state that when the masses are so organised, in accordance with justice and the 'rule of Right', then "...the great revolution prepared for by the ages will begin to march. The POWER of the Deity Himself is in equilibrium with his WISDOM. Hence the only result is HARMONY". (p. 2)

The above passage is interesting for two reasons. First because it deals with the reconciliation of opposites by means of a dialectical process*, and second because of the underlying assumption that the equilibrium in question is something that mankind must establish for itself. Neither this nor any other passage in Pike's work describes 'the Deity' in a form familiar to the Christian or Muslim, i.e. as a God that takes an active involvement in human affairs and initiates and controls what we refer to as historical events.

* The dialectic will emerge time and time again as the fundamental intellectual tool of Freemasonry.

This reflects the Masonic understanding of God, which has its foundations in the Kabbalah and Gnosticism. Here God is conceptualised as remote, as existing on a plane mankind cannot even conceptualise let alone communicate with. Accordingly, we are obliged to 'read the signs' left by God in creation itself and determine for ourselves what 'the Deity' would say and have us do if only He could. In other words, we are 'the Deity', just as the ecumenicist that determines for himself which parts of which Holy Book will determine his salvation supplants God and takes on the role for himself. We are to save ourselves; we cannot look to anything external or greater.

More Masonic parallels with Marxism, or to be precise more Marxist parallels with Masonry, are to be found in Pike's discussion of the evils of tradition (pp. 3-4), which "[tie] the dead corpse of the past, mouth to mouth, with the living present" (p. 4). Marx himself adopted an identical position, as evidenced by one of his most famous quotes from his Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte: "The tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living".

Needless to say, what Pike and Marx are really objecting to is not the existence of traditions per se but the existence of traditions that are incompatible with their own and which stand as impediments to their introduction. Both were quite fanatical in their belief that their traditions represented 'truth' and all others 'falsehood'. In fact, the only real 'truth' here is that the traditions of Marxism are no different than those of Freemasonry: the former is simply a manifestation of the latter, a social and political superstructure constructed on the religious foundation.

Moving on to Masonic symbolism, Pike informs us that the GAVEL represents the will of the people, as directed by the twenty-four-inch rule, symbolising law and order. The former is to be directed by the latter in accordance with the principles of LIBERTY, EQUALITY and FRATERNITY (p. 4). A little later, Pike will tell us that Masons 'aided' the French Revolution, so much so in fact that LIBERTY, EQUALITY and FRATERNITY was adopted as the basis of the revolution, it being proclaimed even as the guillotine's blade rose, fell, and rose again.

Pike tells us that the Masonic ideal is a liberty regulated by law together with equality of rights and 'brotherhood' associated with duties and obligations (p. 4). The astute will notice that such a conceptualisation is alien to English law and the doctrine of 'natural rights', or at least it was prior to the recent introduction of human rights legislation and the ubiquity of European Union law. The very astute will note the similarities between Pike’s formulation and the conditional liberty favoured by former Prime Minister - and alleged Freemason - Tony Blair: rights (conferred by the State rather than possessed by the individual) and 'responsibilities' (actions demonstrating that we ‘deserve’ the aforementioned rights).

Moving on once again, Pike introduces and distinguishes between the rough and perfect ASHLAR, one of the immovable jewels of a Masonic Lodge. The rough ASHLAR represents the people or masses in their 'rude' and unorganised state. The perfect ASHLAR is, unsurprisingly, a symbol of perfection and represents the ideal Masonic State in a harmonious state of equilibrium (pp. 4-5). As to how the rude and unorganised masses are to be perfected, Pike explains that "...the perfect Ashlar is said to be "a stone made ready by the hands of the workmen, to be adjusted by the working-tools of the Fellow-Craft." (p. 4)

Once again we are presented with an uncanny similarity between Freemasonry and Marxist-Leninist thought, together with an earlier, connected and perfectly consistent addition: Hegel's doctrine of the State as the ultimate expression of the ethical idea and thus the means by which to perfect mankind. Hegel himself was fascinated by the occult and a student of Kabbalah, and Marx was one of the so-called ‘Young Hegelians’ prior to inverting Hegel's dialectic, which focused on the cultural and spiritual, and developing its materialistic counterpart.

"The state is the actuality of the ethical Idea. It is ethical mind qua the substantial will manifest and revealed to itself, knowing and thinking itself, accomplishing what it knows and in so far as it knows it. The state exists immediately in custom, mediately in individual self-consciousness, knowledge, and activity, while self-consciousness in virtue of its sentiment towards the state, finds in the state, as its essence and the end-product of its activity, its substantive freedom."

"The Idea of the state in modern times has a special character in that the state is the actualisation of freedom not in accordance with subjective whim but in accordance with the concept of the will, i.e. in accordance with its universality and divinity."

---Hegel, G.F.W., Philosophy of Right

Pike tells us that the rough edges of the rude and unorganised ASHLAR are to be worn smooth by FORCE (the action of the people) acting by RULE (the wisdom and discretion of Freemasonry) as measured by the GAUGE, the precepts and standards of Freemasonry itself (p. 5).

Reflecting the Kabbalah's focus on astrology, Pike refers to each Lodge as a temple mirroring the heavens and supported by three pillars: WISDOM, FORCE and BEAUTY (pp. 5-6). The first two attributes exist in a dialectic (p. 6), their synthesis being HARMONY arising from a state of equilibrium between the contradictory natures of WISDOM (thesis) and FORCE (antithesis).

Pike tells us that:

Harmony in this, as in all the Divine, the material, and the human, is the result of equilibrium, of the sympathy and opposite action of contraries; a single wisdom above them holding the beam of the scales. (p. 7)

As outlined above, the 'single wisdom' in question is not 'the Deity', which remains aloof, remote and unknowable, but those who claim to possess insight into His intentions, methods and laws. The 'single wisdom' is Freemasonry itself, the self-proclaimed ‘brain and law’ of the State, and 'the Deity' is man performing the impossible: saving himself from himself.

We have in this dialectic the recipe for the New World Order itself: government by 'those who know best', backed by the full force of modern weaponry, surveillance and intelligence, and based, as numerous United Nations declarations tell us over and over again, on 'brotherhood'.

Next, Pike discusses the two columns that stand at the entrance of each lodge, forming the Porch of the Temple (p. 7). Each is afforded a name: JACHIN (meaning ‘He shall establish’) and BOAZ (meaning ‘In it is strength’). Pike admits that the Apprentice is not told the meaning of the two columns, the candidate having to wait for ‘enlightenment’ in a higher degree. We, too, shall leave this subject for the time being and discuss it later in the context of the appropriate degree.

Pike claims that the dimensions of the Lodge itself are designed to represent, and draw the Mason’s attention to, the heavens. A depiction of Jacob’s Ladder is sometimes included, a reference to the dream experienced by this well-known Old Testament character, who watched angels use the ladder to ascend and descend to and from heaven. In a typical example of Masonic syncretism, Pike proceeds to elaborate on the biblical version by mixing it with Mithraism, one the Mystery religions of Ancient Rome. Pike claims that the rungs of the ladder represent the seven spheres through which the ascending soul must pass to join the Divine and the seven stages of initiation undertaken by each candidate (p. 8).

This commingling of religious traditions is fully representative of Freemasonry’s attitude towards the established faiths (see below) and my own views vis-à-vis its function as a means to gradually strip away the Mason’s convictions as he progresses through the various degrees. In short, that Freemasonry’s teachings are designed to discredit the established faiths and facilitate the abandonment of religious beliefs antithetical to those of Masonry itself. Freemasonry is the Kabbalah disguised by the use of terminology more-or-less familiar to the candidate.

Pike then identifies three Great Lights of Freemasonry, which form part of the ‘furniture of the lodge’. They are the Bible (or Koran, etc. depending on the country in which the lodge is based), square, and compass (pp. 8-9). As regards the Bible or other Holy Book, Pike tells us that "[t]he obligation of the candidate is always to be taken on the sacred book or books of his religion….[we] have no other concern with your religious creed. (p. 9)

There is, of course, a very good reason for Freemasonry’s subsequent lack of concern with the new member’s faith: thereafter, in line with the above, every effort is made to lead the candidate away from his faith and accept in its place the ‘light’ of Freemasonry and the Kabbalah. The foundation of the Masonic faith is that God is unknowable: we have no knowledge of Him other than the evidence He himself left in His creation. Therefore, we must abandon our existing faith, together with the idea that our Holy Book contains truths directly inspired by God. In its place the candidate must accept the Masonic ‘truth’, which is that of Divine Man saving himself.

This is the basic idea driving the ecumenical movement: as soon as the Christian and Muslim accept that they can meet together and pray to the same God they abandon the core doctrines of their respective faiths, which are fundamentally irreconcilable. The Christian cannot accept Allah as His God without abandoning the doctrine that makes him a Christian: the belief that Jesus was the Son of God manifested in the flesh, something that the Muslim denies. This is equally true of the Muslim who regards Jehovah and Allah as nothing more than different names for the same God. The result is Deism, a creed that views God in a light uncannily similar to that of Gnosticism and the Kabbalah, and a mind-set that encourages one to pick-and-choose the commandments and doctrines that will lead to one’s salvation. Thus man supplants God. Man becomes God. The original sin is repeated.

Gen 3:1-5 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:

But of the fruit of the tree which [is] in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

Returning to the other two Great Lights of Freemasonry, we are informed that the square symbolises the earthly and the compass the spiritual and matters pertaining to the soul. The square is earthly because it represents physical geometry and measurement, the compass heavenly because it prescribes the spheres and circles of heaven (p. 9). That said, Pike makes it clear that the two exist in a dialectic. Just as the compass can be used for geometric purposes, such as plane trigonometry, so too does "...the divine ever mingle with the human; with the earthly the spiritual intermixes" (p. 9).

This last remark is represented symbolically by the hexagram or Star of David, and linguistically by the well-know phrase "As Above So Below", common to Freemasonry, Kabbalah, Theosophy and a whole host of ‘unrelated’ New Age beliefs. Tellingly, Pike’s inference is that "[t]he nations are not bodies politic alone, but also souls politic", an assertion that reflects another of my main contentions: that what we regard as ‘secular’ society is anything but. We cannot destroy or negate God by denying Him. Rather, the atheist (thesis) positions himself in opposition to God (antithesis) and sets in motion a dialectical process, the result of which - the synthesis or negation of the contradiction between the two - is Divine Man. Our so-called ‘secular’ societies are built on a religion predicated on the divinity of mankind.

On the same page (p. 9), Pike reminds us that focusing on the material alone deprives mankind of its ‘universal aim’. Needless to say, Freemasonry believes that its definition of this ‘universal aim’ is the correct one, and towards the end of the chapter he reminds the Mason of his duty to put "…the human race in harmony with its destinies" (p. 14). This is perfectly consistent with the philosophical conceit of the Masonic faith: it alone represents the ‘truth’, even though in essence the truth in question amounts to a denial that other so-called truths and certainties are true. This is identical to modern relativism: all so-called truths are historically and socially relative, except the ‘truth’ that all truths are historically and socially relative, which is somehow immune to its own logic. Relativism is nothing more than the religious dogma of Freemasonry manifested in secular form at the societal level: a macro-social reflection of the micro-social Masonic world.

Pike then proceeds to define the three lesser lights of Freemasonry: the Sun, symbolising the life-giving, active and male power of the Deity; the passive and female Moon, symbolising reproduction (i.e. it reproduces - reflects - light), and the Master of the Lodge, serving as the Mediator that dispenses light to the Brethren (p.10). Pike makes plain what is clear for anyone familiar with Christianity to see: this is the Masonic equivalent of the Holy Trinity, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit rendered in Gnostic terms. It is also clear that the Masonic trinity places a man, the Master of the Lodge, in the position usually occupied by Jesus, who in the Christian formulation stands as the mediator between man and God. A man, therefore, takes on Jesus’ role as the "light and life of the world" (see John 8:12), thus demonstrating that the divinity of man is a core Masonic doctrine.

Elaborating still further, Pike makes it clear that the Sun and Moon represent the Egyptian deities Osiris and Isis. Citing Delauney, Pike explains that the active Sun, Osiris, pours light on the passive Moon, Isis, and both pour light on their offspring, the Blazing Star that represents Horus*. In this, fundamentally dialectical, manner the three "…form the great Equilateral Triangle, in the centre of which is the omnific letter of the Kabalah…" (pp. 10-11). The triangle atop the Double-headed Eagle of Lagosh ornamenting the cover of Morals and Dogma is the same Great Triangle referred to here.

* Those with some knowledge of Freemasonry will be aware that it is the baleful Eye of Horus that is so often presented as the All-Seeing Eye contained within the capstone of a pyramid.

Here, we must read between the lines and understand that Horus represents the synthesis of Osiris and Isis and thus the union of the male and female elements. This is important because the Kabbalah and Gnosticism share a common version of the Fall from the Garden of Eden. In this version, the Fall is staged on a spiritual rather than a material plane and at a time when spiritual ‘man’ was androgynous, combining the male and female elements in one personality. Gnosticism holds that the two elements were separated at the time of the Fall and confined to separate male and female forms here in the material world. Thus the world itself is seen as prison from which one’s spirit must escape, and the Gnostic and Kabbalistic traditions the means by which to attain the knowledge and self-actualisation required to escape this world and re-connect with the Divine.

As mentioned in another post, this understanding stands at odds with the rendering of the allegory and understanding of salvation found in the Christian faith. In Christianity salvation is not predicated on one’s own efforts and knowledge but on the basis of a free gift derived from Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross. One receives the gift simply by accepting Jesus’ divinity, sacrificial death, and resurrection. In so doing the relationship between man and the divine, severed at the time of the Fall, is restored. From a Christian perspective the Gnostic/Kabbalistic rendering merely repeats the mistakes of the past because it makes man responsible for his own salvation. In this sense, by accepting the latter rather than the former we continue the long tradition of ignoring God’s commandments and thus set ourselves above God.

Another important point, one based on my contention that Freemasonry provides the religious foundations for the cultural, socio-economic and political norms and structures of the New World Order, is that feminism is a perfect reflection of the duality outlined above. Feminism’s central thesis is that the masculine and feminine are not biological in origin but represent cultural, social and political norms, which in turn are derived from paternalism: oppressive male dominance. The concomitant of this thesis is that these nurtured gender roles should be eliminated to produce equality between the sexes. Feminism, therefore, is dialectical in nature: it situates the masculine and feminine as antagonistic contradictions and seeks a synthesis based on a merger of the two.

Many feminists will of course take issue with this definition of their ‘ideology’ and deny that they should be classified as ‘gender’ feminists. However, in this as in all things the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and those with eyes to see cannot help but notice the end result of feminism in all its forms. Women have become more masculine, in terms of their psychology and appearance, and men more feminine, encouraged as they are to discover their ‘feminine side’ and battle against their own natures. Masculinity as traditionally defined is now regarded as an oppressive anachronism. Thus the end product is not, as some believe, the dominance of one sex or another but ‘harmony’ between the two: a socially-engineered form of androgyny.

In saying this I am not suggesting that all feminists are dues-paying members of the women’s Masonic movement, the Order of the Eastern Star. Rather, that modern feminism has its origins in Marxism* and that Marxism is clearly based on Kabbalistic principles, partly due to the origin of some of its leading lights and partly because some of these leading lights were well-know in the Masonic and Kabbalistic communities of their time. These figures set the terms of the feminist agenda and feminism remains locked into the same dialectic, even if its language and rhetoric is now significantly different. This is extremely significant, for reasons that will be explained later.

* Early feminists described themselves almost exclusively as Marxist-Feminists or Feminist-Marxists.

Returning to the symbolism of Masonry, Pike continues his explanation of the significance of the five-pointed star and, in a truly ‘prophetic’ passage (pp. 11-12) reminds us that the five-pointed star of Horus is the:

…significant emblem of Liberty and Freedom, blazing with a steady radiance amid the weltering elements of good and evil of Revolutions, and promising serene skies and fertile seasons to the nations, after the storms of change and tumult.

The real significance here is that the five-pointed star is intimately associated with revolutionaries and communism. One is left to ponder what Pike means when he refers to the time ‘after the storms of change and tumult’. One might even ask whether the relationship between communism and Freemasonry is such that, at the time of writing, Pike had some insight into the revolutionary turbulence and resulting duality that would characterise the 20th Century…

In this context, what is most interesting about this last phrase is the passage the follows immediately after. On the same page (p. 12) Pike informs us that in the east of the temple, positioned over the Master and enclosed in a triangle, is the Hebrew letter YOD, representing the ‘Deity’ and the ‘Great Kabbalistic Triads’. He then tells us that the YOD is sometimes placed within the Blazing Star of Horus and symbolises prudence in the literal sense of the term: FORESIGHT. It is for this reason that the Eye of Horus is often referred to as the All-Seeing Eye. Pike tells us that with the YOD added it symbolises divine energy creating the universe.

As regards the significance of Pike moving on to the subject matter of foresight after dropping us a line so pregnant with meaning, it is either a remarkable coincidence or, as I believe, a prime example of a Masonic ‘joke’. By this I mean that most readers, then as now, would have little or no knowledge of communism, any more than they would the Kabbalah. Fewer still would understand the relationship between the three. Knowing this, Pike could safely drop this information into the text knowing that only those ‘in the know’ would realise its significance and appreciate the ‘joke’. Only those blessed with a good education combining politics with the arcane and esoteric would ever latch on. This is a good example of how Freemasonry hides the truth in plain view: its symbols and terminology can be seen and heard every day yet are ignored by most because they neither recognise and understand the symbolism nor speak the language.

The next symbol introduced is that of the point within a circle, representing God in the centre of the universe. This too is of Egyptian origin and the God in question is, once again, Osiris. Pike tells us that in the Kabbalah the point is replaced by the Hebrew YOD, representing the creative energy of God manifested as light and filling the void. This is an obvious reference to the first chapter of Genesis, where we are told that God’s work begins with the declaration: "Let there be light!" This symbol is often represented bordered with two parallel lines, and Pike tells us that the meaning of this addition is "…not for the Apprentice." (pp. 12-13) but instructs the ‘Adepts’ to refer to the Kabbalah for an explanation!

Having said that - remember that Morals and Dogma itself was and is not intended for the Apprentice - Pike then proceeds to explain the significance of the parallel lines. They represent the JUSTICE and MERCY of God in equilibrium, producing HARMONY because "...a single and perfect WISDOM presides over both" (p. 13). Again, we can infer that the WISDOM that presides over both is as Masonic and man-made as the JUSTICE and MERCY in equilibrium. In this context, we must ask how the justice and mercy of God could ever be out of balance, and then understand that the state of equilibrium between the two is something to be established by man himself. It is not the naturally occurring balance one would expect from the divine and infallible nature of a God that could never be, as it were, out of synch with himself. Rather, it is an engineered state, the product of a carefully-crafted dialectical process and a perfect reflection of Freemasonry’s Kabbalistic understanding of the nature of God.

The rest of pages 13 and 14 are dedicated to an introduction to the Masonic decalogue, Masonry’s version of the Ten Commandments. I will not repeat them all here as the reader can refer to the text of Morals and Dogma if so desired. Having said that, it is interesting to note the first commandment, which informs us that God is the "…Eternal, Omnipotent, Immutable WISDOM and Supreme INTELLIGENCE…" to be revered and adored. When one considers the nature of the ‘the Deity’, it is clear that this amounts to an instruction to revere and adore oneself and one’s fellow ‘deities’.

Moreover, Freemasonry’s Great Commandment is identical to that of Christianity and Pike echoes the words of Jesus himself: "A new commandment give I unto you: that ye love one another! He that saith he is in the light, and hateth his brother, remaineth still in the darkness." Unfortunately, whereas Christ was referring to all men, Pike’s Great Commandment is applicable only to the brethren of Freemasonry. The Mason is not obliged to demonstrate love towards the ‘Profane’ that exist outside Masonry.

Pike’s words here reflect another core Masonic and Kabbalistic belief: that the established religions represent a distorted version of the Masonic faith. The distortion itself is regarded as a necessary illusion designed to reflect the nature and capabilities of those that adhere to these faiths, thus preventing ‘the Profane’ from distorting the purity of the ‘truth’ practiced by the Adepts. In other words, because they are not yet ready to ‘receive the light’ (the Gnostic and Kabbalistic ‘truths’ that supposedly lie hidden in the Holy Books of these faiths) they are given a hollow shell. This leaves the Adepts free to practice and maintain the purity of the ‘true’ religion, until such time as the Adepts have raised society to a level where the people are capable of receiving the ‘truth’.

In this context, it is important to understand the true meaning of the following words:

[I]t is…the duty of Masonry to assist in elevating the moral and intellectual level of society; in coining knowledge, bringing ideas into circulation, and causing the mind of youth to grow; and in putting, gradually, by the teachings of axioms and the promulgation of positive laws, the human race in harmony with its destinies. (p. 14)

Thus we infer that it is the duty of the Mason to inject Masonic ideas into the society to which he belongs. A Mason of relatively low social status can do no more than practice the morals and dogmas within his own micro-social world. The Mason of high status – the academic, the priest, the legislator, the civil servant – can do significantly more than this, particularly when acting in concert with his brethren at the same level.

What Pike is telling us is that Masonry is a revolutionary organisation that operates by evolutionary means. Its agents provocateurs live among us, sharing and working towards the same end, identifying one another by means of handshakes and watchwords and surreptitiously abusing their positions to introduce and pass off Masonic doctrine as ‘secular’ legislation, training programmes, policy measures, academic theses, and so on. This is happening today.

Each party believes or pretends that it has the only true text, and each faction believes or pretends that it alone possesses the light. Moreover, factions are blind men, who aim straight, errors are excellent projectiles, striking skillfully, and with all the violence that springs from false reasoning, wherever a want of logic in those who defend the right, like a defect in a cuirass, makes them vulnerable. (p. 15)

As mentioned above, Freemasonry is, for reasons that are never explained, the only faction that is not a faction because it and it alone ‘possesses the light’. All others are in error. That most Masons never see the flaw in their logic reflects not only their understanding of the Craft but also the fundamentally religious nature of Freemasonry. It is a dogma. To reiterate what I have said elsewhere, Kabbalists do not really care what you believe – their faith is itself a mixture of the Eastern religions, ancient Mystery religions and the greatmain monotheistic faiths – provided your beliefs do not challenge the core religious and philosophical assumptions of their own. One can ‘believe’ in Christianity provided that one accepts that Jesus was not really divine and the Bible not really divinely inspired. This is the central tenet of ecumenicalism, in practice if not in theory. Similarly, one can call oneself a Muslim provided that one accepts the Koran as just one of many equally valid Holy Books, and in so doing reduce oneself to a Deist open to the doctrines of the Kabbalah.

This dialectical process of reconciling opposites is the basic tool of Freemasonry and the Kabballah – and of communism – and can be seen at work in almost every section of society. So-called ‘diverse’ cultures and faiths are brought together to reconcile their positions and we are all ‘encouraged’ – by increasingly draconian legislation, policy initiatives and training programmes - to embrace and celebrate every different ‘way of being human’. When we accept this we sacrifice our commitment to our own religious, cultural and individual standards. We say, in effect, that homosexuality is as normal and natural as heterosexuality, that Christianity is just a different cultural interpretation of Islam, that to cling to and value our own culture and heritage is a source of ‘disharmony’ and strife. We end up in a state where all values are regarded as relative and temporary and all cultures and faiths a hollow shell devoid of real meaning and real diversity.

I have also said elsewhere that the purpose of these developments reflects the fundamental religious assumption of Freemasonry and Kabbalism: that divine man can return mankind to the state of harmony and balance that existed prior to the Fall. These ‘secular’ developments are but external manifestations of this religious belief and the only real ‘truth’ here is that man is repeating the same original sin over and over again, failing to understand that the WISDOM spoken of by Pike et al is identical to the ‘wisdom’ offered by the allegorical Serpent. Man continues to ignore the truly divine in the belief that man can become as God is. The history of the human race is a damning indictment of this assumption.

Freemasonry and Kabbalah: the Common Purpose

2007-11-09T20:08:00.000Z

The below is reproduced from the Conspiraloon Alliance blog. Members of the Alliance noticed one of my posts about Masonic imagery, Common Purpose and the Bank Of England and lampooned it under the title of the S Club 7 song Reach For The Stars, Climb Every Mountain Higher. This post is rather lengthy, but if you read in you'll find there's a certain irony in the Alliance's choice of title. These are the responses to the post, as made by myself and members of the Alliance, although the Postscript was not added to the Alliance's blog.

The original can be found on the Conspiraloon Alliance blog.

I thoroughly enjoyed it guys – please feel free to lampoon me whenever the urge arises!

J.P. Stonehouse said...

Oh...I get it...it's just a coincidence that the Common Purpose logo employs the Star of David and the jewel associated with the 33rd Degree of Scottish Rite Freemasonry! I suppose they just copied and pasted the logo from a clip-art CD found in the bottom of a bargain bin in Woolworths? And I simply imagined seeing both the above symbols on the new £20 note! And it's OK for our currency to feature Masonic symbols because we must at all costs take Freemasonry's own definition of itself at face value! Because everyone **knows** that Freemasonry is just a sort of friendly society for like-minded brethren to share a meal or two and engage in a little charity work. And everyone just happens to **know** this even though Freemasonry is a society with secrets and does not permit members to discuss 'the Craft' with non-members?

By the same logic we MUST have invaded Iraq for the reasons given by the British and American governments...

Perhaps you guys need to re-read and internalise your 'Conspiracy Theorist Characteristics': arrogance, leaping to conclusions, fondness for certain stock phrases...you must be referring to yourselves!

02 November 2007 14:42

The Antagonist said...

Thanks for stopping by, J.P.

Perhaps you guys need to re-read and internalise your 'Conspiracy Theorist Characteristics': arrogance, leaping to conclusions, fondness for certain stock phrases...you must be referring to yourselves!

Ah! You've seen through our cunning use of irony!

And, by the self same logic you outline, it MUST be a Communist Conspiracy that the Monarch's home is fixed into a pyramid, complete with a Communist Conspiracy eye of Horus fountain, and that The Mall is the flagpole from which Communist Conspirators in Buck House fly their own Jolly Roger.

We'll save the inner and outer circles of The Communist Regent's Park for another time.

02 November 2007 15:38

J.P. Stonehouse said...

And, by the self same logic you outline, it MUST be a Communist Conspiracy that the Monarch's home is fixed into a pyramid, complete with a Communist Conspiracy eye of Horus fountain, and that The Mall is the flagpole from which Communist Conspirators in Buck House fly their own Jolly Roger.

Why 'must' it? I was simply offering an analogy. To paraphrase words attributed to Freud: sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

It seems to me that in their own way some of the 'anti-conspiracists' are just as extreme as proponents of 'chem-trails' and 'multi-dimensional lizards'. How many 'coincidences' are required before an 'anti' sits up and takes notice? Two? Five? Ten? Twenty? Fifty? Or an infinite number because, in fact, some of the detractors are as close-minded as some of the conspiracists are gullible.

As for the 'communist conspiracy', I certainly use terms such as 'communist-style' and do so because, in my view, the phenomena I'm describing have a distinct and rather extreme left-wing bias. I'm reluctant to apply the term itself because it's pregnant with meaning, and by that I mean unhelpful for those who have either not read, or failed to understand, Marxist theory and assume that 'communism' is a synonym for 'USSR'. Where I have used the term I've done so only to highlight parallels between states that identify themselves, or are identified by others, as 'communist' and entities such as the EU; the point being that states such as China have moved towards a Western economic model just as the West seems hell-bent on moving closer to a 'communist' political model.

As for the Freemasons, they warrant serious study. Once familiar with Masonic imagery and philosophy you may find that you see and hear 'coincidences' on a daily basis. The real question is this: would your belief system permit you to accept that there's a hidden world beyond surface appearances? And to question the motives and agendas of these secretive groups?

02 November 2007 18:33

The Antagonist said...

GODMA RULES KO!

As for the Freemasons, they warrant serious study. Once familiar with Masonic imagery and philosophy you may find that you see and hear 'coincidences' on a daily basis. The real question is this: would your belief system permit you to accept that there's a hidden world beyond surface appearances?

It is impossible to become a member of the Conspiraloon™ Alliance if your belief system doesn't permit you to accept such a notion. A second requirement is that one notices these apparent 'coincidences', with a third requirement being that one views the 'coincidences' in their correct historical and political context.

The Freemasons might be fruity, but it's the Fascists that must be overcome.

02 November 2007 20:15

J.P. Stonehouse said...

It is impossible to become a member of the Conspiraloon™ Alliance if your belief system doesn't permit you to accept such a notion. A second requirement is that one notices these apparent 'coincidences', with a third requirement being that one views the 'coincidences' in their correct historical and political context.

And what exactly is the 'correct historical and political context' in which we must situate Freemasonry? I return to my original point: are we to take Freemasonry at face value?

Who determines what constitutes the 'correct historical and political context' for any given event? How will the history books define the historical and political context of, say, Iraq? As a 'mistake' or the product of a gross failure on the part of intelligence agencies? Do you subscribe to this view today or do you intend to wait until 'Great Minds' define the 'correct historical and political context' for you?

Historians and journalists share a common flaw: the tendency to regurgitate information provided by 'official' and 'authoritative' sources and call the resulting vomitus 'history' and 'news' respectively.

03 November 2007 03:54

Tom said...

Fascists and Communists share a common flaw: mass-murdering people. But that also went on before either word was coined. Freemasonry has been around a long time and claims to go back even further. And of course none of these categories are mutually exclusive.

If you look into it, the Royal family do appear to believe they're actually the Tribe of Judah on the throne of David. So it's hardly surprising they would have the symbols on a £20 note. And yes, Freemasonry is partly about pretending to be Jewish, hence all the secrecy. After all, if you're the "chosen people" you can do what you want without fear of being wrong.

Of course it would be anti-Japhetism for me to criticise the queen. Far be it from me to leap to a conclusion. But her family was very fond of that Schicklgruber fellow.

03 November 2007 05:03

Paul said...

The real question is this: would your belief system permit you to accept that there's a hidden world beyond surface appearances? And to question the motives and agendas of these secretive groups?

Not a chance, everything is exactly as we are told, the infanticide of iraq was 'a price worth paying', we invaded iraq because it had weapons of mass destruction and the muslim hive mind is on the verge of imposing the caliphate as we speak.

Well, ask a silly question.

03 November 2007 05:05

Paul said...

Fascists and Communists share a common flaw: mass-murdering people.
I believe they share this flaw with our most ardent democratic free traders, such as our middle east envoy. The mercantilist british empire certainly did for plenty of indians.

Some might say the land of the free has indulged as well.

The congolese have lost maybe 3 million to our non communist and non fascist predations over the last decade

03 November 2007 05:53

J.P. Stonehouse said...

Not a chance, everything is exactly as we are told, the infanticide of iraq was 'a price worth paying', we invaded iraq because it had weapons of mass destruction and the muslim hive mind is on the verge of imposing the caliphate as we speak. Well, ask a silly question.

It was a rhetorical question, actually; and one directed at a specific individual.

03 November 2007 06:20

Paul said...

It was a rhetorical question, actually;

They're not exclusive.

I fear you have taken offence at stef's post, which is not intended at all, as he is genuinely fascinated by these 'coincidences' as is easily seen in his non-alliance site.

03 November 2007 06:38

J.P. Stonehouse said...

If you look into it, the Royal family do appear to believe they're actually the Tribe of Judah on the throne of David. So it's hardly surprising they would have the symbols on a £20 note. And yes, Freemasonry is partly about pretending to be Jewish, hence all the secrecy. After all, if you're the "chosen people" you can do what you want without fear of being wrong.

One doesn't have to 'pretend' to be Jewish; anyone can convert to Judaism. If this is true - and it certainly is - then why the secrecy? Surely you're not suggesting that Masons are, as it were, 'in-the-closet' and not yet ready to declare themselves Jews?

What is Freemasonry 'about'? Well, it brings together people of 'diverse' socio-economic, cultural and religious backgrounds and 'unites' them by imposing an artificial form of harmony. This is achieved by prohibiting discussion of cultural, religious and political affairs (once in a lodge a Mason must speak only of Masonry) and, over time, replacing these diverse cultural, religious and political views with their Masonic equivalents.

Now, you may say that this is a contradiction. It's not, simply because the Masonic equivalents are identical to the doctrines of diversity and tolerance that are so widely preached today. As one progresses through the Masonic degrees one's convictions are stripped away and replaced with the 'religion' of secular fundamentalism and its associated doctrines and devices: relativism, pluralism, tolerance, diversity, and so on.

The Masonic 'god' is a prime example: the Great Architect of the Universe represents all gods, and thus no gods. The Christian and Muslim can both worship the GAOTU but not without abandoning the doctrinal differences that define their respective faiths and their identity as a Christian or Muslim. By these means opposites are reconciled and harmony is achieved, and all for the low, low cost of robbing members of the real diversity identified as the purpose for bringing them together in the first place!

It is no 'coincidence' that organisations such as Common Purpose preach exactly the same doctrine as that described above. Nor is it a coincidence that society as a whole is now awash with these same doctrines. Nor is it a 'coincidence' that legislators' attention is so firmly fixed on 'hate crimes' and the criminalisation (i.e. prohibition) of views based on moral certainties and religious convictions.

What we are seeing is an attempt to impose on the macro-social world a template that derives from, and originated in, the micro-social Masonic world. That is not to say that each and every group that espouses such views is Masonic; merely that the ideas themselves derive from, have been promoted by and owe their success to Freemasonry.

In the coming New World Order we will all be required to "receive the light", if not voluntarily then by some other contrived means, most probably delivered by 'secular' organisations such as Common Purpose, an organisation that hides its own brand of fundamentalism in the kind of jargon-laden training programmes we've all become accustomed to.

03 November 2007 07:40

Tom said...

One doesn't have to 'pretend' to be Jewish; anyone can convert to Judaism. If this is true - and it certainly is - then why the secrecy? Surely you're not suggesting that Masons are, as it were, 'in-the-closet' and not yet ready to declare themselves Jews?

I agree that's how it works in the real world. But why do that when you can trace an ancient bloodline, or find the Ark of the Covenant buried by some wacky ancestor? There are probably at least four or five broad groups of people competing for the same exclusive birthright. Don't you think the "British Israel" ideology might offend some in the Middle East?

All the "diversity and tolerance" in masonry is bullshit if you ask me (not that you did). They say that to polish their image but it's more about exclusivity and becoming a better "class" of person than the outsiders. Anyone can make those words mean anything you want, that's a politician's job. It doesn't mean that anyone who might be even slightly tolerant is tinged by the stench of Masonry.

As one progresses through the Masonic degrees one's convictions are stripped away and replaced with the 'religion' of secular fundamentalism and its associated doctrines and devices: relativism, pluralism, tolerance, diversity, and so on.

What makes you so sure that's the whole story if it's such a secret? Are you one of them? I don't think all those rituals are exactly secular, they're just a private religion. Who knows what they're worshipping, do they even know?

03 November 2007 17:04

J.P. Stonehouse said...

All the "diversity and tolerance" in masonry is bullshit if you ask me (not that you did). They say that to polish their image but it's more about exclusivity and becoming a better "class" of person than the outsiders. Anyone can make those words mean anything you want, that's a politician's job. It doesn't mean that anyone who might be even slightly tolerant is tinged by the stench of Masonry.

It both is and isn't bullshit at one and the same time. Bear in mind that today's 'tolerance' has nothing whatsoever in common with the liberal understanding of the term. It is in fact the complete reversal of the liberal understanding, because it requires us to dilute our beliefs and hold our tongues.

That aside, the elitism of Freemasonry reflects its Kabbalistic and Gnostic roots: initiates progress through degrees and the true meaning of the higher degrees is kept hidden from those at lower levels. Also, in line with the Gnostic tradition, only those with the 'divine spark' are capable of 'receiving the light'. Remember that Masons are 'the sacred' and everybody else 'the profane'; this is why the fundamentals are kept hidden and 'the profane' are dragged along in Freemasonry's wake.

Who knows what they're worshipping, do they even know?

As per the above, the vast majority of Masons do not progress beyond the degrees required to attain Master Mason status. The majority, therefore, know as much as they need to know.

To fully understand what those at the higher levels know and believe requires knowledge of the Kabballah and Gnosticism, and a proper understanding of just how antagonistic these beliefs are to the main monotheistic faiths.

For example, in the Christian tradition anybody can receive salvation, simply by accepting that Christ was God-in-the-flesh. In so doing they establish a direct relationship between themselves and the divine on the basis of a free gift: their salvation is not dependent upon their own actions or good deeds.

By contrast, the God of Freemasonry, which is the God of the Kabballah and Gnosticism, is fundamentally unknowable. According to this tradition, God was not even responsible for creation (this was performed by lower level 'emanations') and exists on a plane that humans cannot even conceptualise let alone communicate or establish a direct relationship with.

In this tradition the soul is viewed as a prisoner of its corporeal form - the physical body - and it is the responsibility of each individual, or rather of those who possess the 'divine spark' (or in New Age parlance 'the Christ within'), to attain the knowledge and level of perfection required to release the soul from the material plane and return to the 'Great Light of Ain Soph', the highest-level emanation of God. In other words, WE are responsible for our own salvation; WE are gods.

As in the Christian and Judaic traditions, the imprisonment of the soul is viewed in the context of The Fall from the Garden of Eden, the difference being that Gnosticism stages The Fall on a spiritual rather than material plane and regards the pre-Fall soul as androgynous - both male and female combined - prior to its being torn apart into opposites and re-situated on the material plane, trapped in human form.

It is vital to understand the implications of these beliefs. Realisation of the doctrine of the perfectibility of the soul and union of male and female requires a fundamental change in the material conditions of existence and human social relationships. In other words, one cannot attain salvation in a world characterised by division and inequality, particularly inequality between men and women and especially divisions that reflect an 'incorrect' understanding of the 'true' nature of God and thus represent an 'impediment' to salvation for those who possess the 'divine spark'.

The changes we have witnessed over the past forty or fifty years, and which are proceeding apace even as I write, are a perfect reflection of the religious dogmas and requirements of the Kabballistic and Gnostic traditions, and by definition Freemasonry. They represent the material and social conditions required for the realisation of these dogmas.

Take Feminism for example, the core belief of which is that masculinity and femininity are social constructs that must be eradicated, resulting in 'equality between the sexes'. Feminism is a dialectical process that places the masculine and feminine at odds with one another, so as to bring about a reconciliation of the two: the 're-androgynisation' of the sexes. Met any feminine women lately? Noticed how the traditional concept of masculinity is now regarded as an oppressive anachronism? Ever been encouraged to 'discover your feminine side'?

Consider also the world-wide ecumenical movement that has suddenly sprung to prominence, as if from out of nowhere. Inter-faith 'dialog' and multi-faith worship performs the same function as that outlined in my previous post. When a Christian and Muslim come together and accept that they worship the same God they undermine their faiths and lose the identity as Christians and Muslims.

The Christian God has a Son named Jesus Christ and recognition of Christ's divine status is a prerequisite if one is to call oneself a Christian. Allah, however, does not have a Son and regards Jesus as merely a prophet. The Christian and Muslim cannot accept that the Christian and Muslim Gods are one and the same without abandoning their respective conceptualisations of God. In so doing, they cease to be Christian and Muslim, in the sense that Jesus and Mohammed become nothing more than 'great figures' after the fashion of Buddha, Krishna, and so on. Their Gods become all Gods, and thus no Gods.

The main point here is that the process facilitates the abandonment of the belief that their respective faiths are divinely inspired. Just as Jesus and Mohammed become just two of many great spiritual leaders, the Bible and Koran become just two of many great spiritual works coined by men and men alone. The Masonic faith simply cannot accept that it is possible to communicate with the divine, that these works represent 'divinely inspired' messages from God, or that salvation comes from God and God alone, and has embarked on a war against those that believe otherwise.

Notice that I focus almost entirely on Islam and Christianity? Gnosticism is closely related to the religions of the Orient; consequently, the polytheistic faiths are unproblematic because their 'many' gods are in fact simply different countenances or emanations of a single God. As such, they do not represent an obstacle or threat to the future 'World Religion'. Islam is more problematic, not because it isn't predicated on building an earthly kingdom but because Muslim's believe that the kingdom in question should be an Islamic kingdom based on Islamic law. Christianity is regarded as an outright enemy because it believes in a spiritual rather than earthly kingdom, one that can only be established by the Second Coming rather than mere mortals.

The basic purpose of these assaults, and indeed the purpose of those driving the process, is, quite literally, to return mankind to its pre-Fall condition of harmony and balance. These people seriously believe that they are creating a new Garden of Eden, thus bringing together what God has torn asunder and, in the process, spitting in His eye. The basic philosophy is not only that God is unknowable but also that He is not required: mankind IS divine and - with the 'correct' tutelage of course - can attain a state of perfection without God. This is the fundamental, albeit unstated, aim of secular humanism, which in turn is the fundamental aim of Freemasonry.

There are, of course, many more examples. I have already referred to diversity and tolerance, which to reiterate are promulgated for the purpose of digging away at the foundations of moral certainties and cultural differences by prohibiting and criminalising 'discrimination' (literal meaning: 'the recognition of qualities and differences'), and outlined how these are but a mirror image of Masonic rules that prohibit the discussion of 'divisive' issues so as to facilitate indoctrination into the morals and dogmas of Freemasonry and replace real pluralism and diversity with uniformity of belief.

In the final analysis, there is nothing 'secular' about 'secular society'. In fact, 'secularism' is merely a device used to further the aims of religious fanatics who believe they can make it possible for the 'lion to lay down with the lamb' by obliging us all to 'beat our swords into ploughshares', the swords in question being anything opposed to an artificial 'unity', 'solidarity' and 'brotherhood'. This is what the New World Order is all about: a world in which we all get a chance to 'fulfil our potential' and, if our 'divine spark' is bright enough, re-join the 'Great Light' in the sky.

04 November 2007 08:24

Tom said...

I'd go along with some of that analysis. I'm curious why you think that monotheistic faiths can each have their own God? Are you saying that Muslims just made their God up or do you recognise that there are different names for God?

Do you ever wonder if the Second Coming has already happened but you missed it? Watch out if it does happen, the Antichrist is meant to be turning up too.

04 November 2007 15:26

J.P. Stonehouse said...

I'm curious why you think that monotheistic faiths can each have their own God? Are you saying that Muslims just made their God up or do you recognise that there are different names for God?

No. In fact, the idea that the world's religions worship the same God under different names lies at the heart of all this. I believe that a person is entitled to believe what he or she wants. If this means adhering to Christian doctrine, which is at odds with the doctrines of the other faiths, then so be it.

Tolerance as conceptualised in the liberal tradition was predicated on this principle, the only limitation being the requirement not to force one's beliefs on others. As stated above, today's tolerance stands diametrically opposed to the liberal understanding of the term: we must accept, embrace and celebrate everything.

To reiterate, the defining characteristic of a Christian is not that he believes in God, or that his God is called Jehovah as opposed to Allah, but that he believes that salvation and access to the divine can only be attained through belief in Jesus Christ as the Son of God. The defining characteristic of a Muslim is quite different and fundamentally irreconcilable with that of the Christian, because the Islamic faith regards Jesus as a prophet, and one not even on a par with Mohammed.

Remove these defining characteristics of the two faiths and what you're left with is, in effect, Deism: a belief curiously similar to that of Gnosticism.

The problem here isn't God but the existence of doctrines that a) are inconsistent with Gnostic beliefs about the nature of God and b) by their practice and existence in undiluted form militate against Gnosticism's obsession with unity and harmony.

The issue here is discrimination; the recognition of qualities and differences, and the ability to differentiate, select and choose on the basis of this recognition. And how does one prevent the recognition of qualities and differences? By removing these qualities and differences from plain view in a great levelling of everyone and everything. You start by criminalising speech that draws attention to these qualities and differences in a negative way. The term 'negative' refers not only to condemnation or the expression of disapproval but also to the simple desire not to take part or belong.

These people don't really care what you call God or how you worship Him provided you accept their conceptualisation of God and put aside your own. They don't care because, in reality, their 'God' is simply a dialectical blunt instrument designed to crack the resistance of those who want to remain separate and distinct.

In my last comment I referred to Madonna's predilection for on-stage crucifixion. Why does she do this? Pissing off Christians is one reason, the other being her desire to make a statement as regards her own divinity.

David Blaine did exactly the same thing is his global 'magic trick' called, coincidentally of course, Above The Below. Blaine supposedly starved himself for 44-days (while 'the profane' below waved hamburgers at him) in a re-enactment of Jesus' 40-days of fasting and temptation in the wilderness.

David's message to the world, his little philosophical joke that so few understood and which no doubt sustained him for the duration, is that he too is divine. More so than Jesus in fact, because he managed 44 days in comparison with the latter's 40.

This is Gnosticism's core belief: the divinity of man. The means by which this 'divinity' is to be brought to fruition is the elimination of the differences and doctrines that stand opposed to it. God is irrelevant. We are God.

These people learned much from the great social experiment that was Communism. What they learned was that it is neither desirable nor necessary to actually abolish religion. Undesirable because religion and spirituality appear to be part and parcel of human nature, and unnecessary because one needs only to redefine religion in a way that neutralises it as a form of allegiance separate to, and antagonistic towards, that of your own.

04 November 2007 18:20

J.P. Stonehouse said...

Just one final point before I take heed of your 'Conspiracy Theorist Characteristics' and withdraw.

If any of you are really interested in what's happening around us then the only way to understand it is to stop looking at it in secular terms. When you hear of the next law prohibiting 'hate speech' - here in the UK we have yet another on the horizon - don't think of it as a piece of secular legislation but as a religious commandment.

Just as Christians are expected to act on Jesus' mandate to 'make disciples of all nations', the people I'm describing are also possessed of an evangelical zeal. Their 'divine mission', as described above, is to create paradise right here on earth, an aim best represented by the phrase "As above, so below". The flip side to this coin is common to all fundamentalisms: the persecution of blasphemers and heretics; those who violate or refuse to acknowledge the commandments and doctrines of the faith.

Until the mid-1960s the laws of Western societies reflected their Judaeo-Christian heritage. From this point onwards they have been, and continue to be, slowly and insidiously replaced and/or amended in a manner consistent with the religious underpinnings of the society to come, so as to reflect its Masonic/Kabbalistic/Gnostic roots.

Have any of you noticed that the Kabbalah, a religious tradition hitherto notable only for the fact that it has languished in obscurity for centuries, is now being openly endorsed by major celebrities, Madonna being the leading 'star' in question. For some reason, this not-so-young lady is rather fond of being crucified on stage...I wonder why? No matter...just another coincidence...

Altogether now:

Zephyr in the sky at night I wonder
Do my tears of mourning sink beneath the sun
She's got herself a universe gone quickly
For the call of thunder threatens everyone

And I feel like I just got home
And I feel
And I feel like I just got home
And I feel

Faster than the speeding light shes flying
Trying to remember where it all began
Shes got herself a little piece of heaven
Waiting for the time when earth shall be as one

Quicker than a ray of light
Quicker than a ray of light
Quicker than a ray of light
And I feel

Quicker than a ray of light
Then gone for
Someone else shall be there
Through the endless years
Shes got herself a universe
Shes got herself a universe
Shes got herself a universe

And I feel
And I feel
And I feel like I just got home
And I feel
Quicker than a ray of light shes flying
Quicker than a ray of light Im flying

04 November 2007 16:38

Jon Doy said...

Hi J.P.

Firstly, allow me to thank you for the time you have expended on your thought provoking comments

As a chartered member of the Conspiraloon Alliance i feel i must clarify our position somewhat: our position being that we conspiraloons do believe that freemasonry, conspiracy, and undisclosed power structures exist and should be the subject of wider education to the profane, but only in the context that there are alien oppressors from space/the future deep at the heart of them

:wink wink:

(perhaps with some holograms, and of course a bit of that Mayan 'do nothing' philosophy thrown in for good measure)

:wink becomes permanent Herbert Lom-esque tick:

The Conspiraloon characteristics were handed down to us by the anti-conspiraloons from their (what they perceive to be) on-high position,the antiloons describe their self imposed - and polarised-to-our-own-existence - world view as being exemplified in the notion that all is mere coincidence and nothing is connected

These very same people are of the opinion that it is the Conspiraloon who needs to replace reality with conspiracy theory as this is a comfort in the stead of the scary world in which no-one is in control of anything, and all is unpredictable chaos at work

This is, of course counter intuitive to say the least - it is the antiloon for whom comforting nonsense has replaced reality - the land of the conspiraloon is a most disconcerting world in which some of these many supposed "cock-ups" can be more accurately interpreted and placed into their appropriate contexts, and there's little comfort to be gained in that..it is the antiloon who is the dreaming fool here

I'm certain that Stef is completely supportive of your analysis, but as conspiraloons, often we have to encode the true meanings of our work such that the alien horde do not find us a threat and make us into snack treats

Quicker than a ray of light indeed - we don't call her Maddie 'cos it's quicker than saying Madonna

It's because she's lost the plot to a bunch of psychobullshitters

05 November 2007 05:05

Postscript

The below is my rejoinder to this last comment:

As a chartered member of the Conspiraloon Alliance i feel i must clarify our position somewhat: our position being that we conspiraloons do believe that freemasonry, conspiracy, and undisclosed power structures exist and should be the subject of wider education to the profane, but only in the context that there are alien oppressors from space/the future deep at the heart of them.

Aaahh..now I see the missing piece of the jigsaw! I’ll return to bore you with my ravings as soon as I’ve woven the alien space oppressors into my tapestry of madness!

These very same people are of the opinion that it is the Conspiraloon who needs to replace reality with conspiracy theory as this is a comfort in the stead of the scary world in which no-one is in control of anything, and all is unpredictable chaos at work.

The idea that we inhabit a world in which ‘no-one is in control of anything’ is often presented as an axiom. It’s corollary is that complexity and the observation and discovery of regularities, patterns, and causalities are incompatible. But this is nothing more than an assertion; like any other assertion it must be put to the test.

Quicker than a ray of light indeed - we don't call her maddie 'cos it's quicker than saying Madonna. it's because she's lost the plot to a bunch of psychobullshitters.

I agree with you. Unfortunately, these same ‘psychobullshitters’ occupy positions that allow them to define what is and is not acceptable for you to think and say. Theirs is the ultimate dogma because its basic predicate is that there is no dogma. This is the ‘truth’ they want us all to accept and embrace. Yet their ‘truth’ is identical to the paradox of relativism: if all so-called truths are specific to particular societies at particular stages of historical development then the ‘truth’ that there is no truth must be specific to our society and its stage of historical development. Consequently, their ‘truth’ is no more 'true' than any other ‘truth’.

Read Article 1 of the United Nation’s Declaration on Principles of Tolerance:

Tolerance is respect, acceptance and appreciation of the rich diversity of our world's cultures, our forms of expression and ways of being human. It is fostered by knowledge, openness, communication and freedom of thought, conscience and belief. Tolerance is harmony in difference. It is not only a moral duty, it is also a political and legal requirement. Tolerance, the virtue that makes peace possible, contributes to the replacement of the culture of war by a culture of peace.

Tolerance is now a ‘political and legal requirement’. In what way does the above definition resemble the traditional liberal understanding of the term? Since when did tolerance entail a legal obligation to accept and appreciate values and practices that we may well find immoral, abhorrent, unethical, divisive or just plain wrong? And just how is ‘freedom of conscience and belief’ compatible with this obligation? What happens when we exercise our right to freedom of thought, conscience and belief in ways that do not ‘respect, accept and appreciate’ each and every ‘way of being human’?

As for ‘harmony in difference’, accepting and appreciating somebody else’s culture, religion, sexuality or ideology always requires us to sacrifice or denigrate a part of our own. When this happens on all sides the result is an insipid pastiche devoid of the strong flavours that define the difference. Harmony is found in uniformity because real difference brings disagreement, strife and conflict.

But you say that Declarations of this sort are just weasel words and meaningless political drivel? The UN is a well-known hot-bed of New Age fanaticism staffed with more than its fair share of those ‘waiting for the world to be one’. Yet we’re told that it’s simply the instrument of the Great Powers and has no real power of its own. Strange, then, that this meaningless political drivel and New Age nonsense has somehow weasled its way onto our statute books and is daily being pressed farther into the hearts and minds of Joe Public.

Behold brethren! I write in letters of fire and give you these new commandments!

Thou shalt accept and embrace all cultures!
Thou shalt embrace all religions! (and in so doing embrace mine)
Thou shalt embrace every ‘way of being human’!
Thou shalt not believe in, or base your actions on, moral absolutes!
Thou shalt not cling to the ‘prejudices’ of your Holy Books!
Thou shalt not seek to be apart, separate or different!

We’ve been conditioned to regard these new commandments as ‘secular’ in origin and purpose, when in fact they reflect the new cultural, social, and political superstructure being constructed on the new religious foundation.

The atheist is open and amenable to the new doctrine because he has already placed man at the centre of everything. That the atheist believes himself to be free of all religious conviction is entirely irrelevant because he cannot help but tread the path laid down by these people. The atheist has - voluntarily - already accepted that there are no moral absolutes and believes it absurd to cling to doctrines and traditions that, in the absence of God, can only be regarded as the product of man. The atheist creates his own commandments, his own morals. He is God. He is the divine. His limitations only those he chooses to impose upon himself.

The same holds true of the individual that has accepted that the gods of the world's religions are just different cultural representations of his God. He abandons the doctrine of his faith, because in order to reach this point he must of necessity abandon the idea that his Holy Book was inspired by his God. He accepts the Kabbalah’s conception of God: remote, unknowable and unreachable. Thus does his Holy Book also become the work of man. His previously sacrosanct Holy Book is reduced to the status of an a la carte menu: he can pick and choose from it, or from the Holy Books of other faiths, as he sees fit. In so doing he himself defines what will and will not result in his salvation. He too becomes God.

Gen 2:15-17 And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it. And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Gen 3:1-5 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which [is] in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

God commanded man; man ignored the commandment; man became God. They want a wholesale return to this state (Christianity and Islam undermine it because they advocate adherence to the original relationship) so that a divine mankind can create its own Paradise. This is why these people are so keen for us all to move away from the idea that God has ever communicated anything to us. Instead, make up your own faith! Be your own God!

Don’t get me wrong: I’m no religious fanatic. I've never 'spoke in tongues', handled poisonous snakes, writhed in religious ecstasy or received a vision. I’m simply pointing out that our ‘secular society’ is a myth: the world has never known a secular society and never will. Politics and law represent the continuation of religion by other means. Today, Moses has re-climbed the mountain and received the Law - from himself.

You may argue that this is what happened in the first place, and that the established religions have wrought enough havoc already. And for the most part I would agree with this. The problem is that divine man is more terrible than any God-fearing persecutor of heretics, blasphemers and apostates. History furnishes us with numerous examples, from Caligula Caesar through to Lenin and Stalin. The latter killed indiscriminately, the vast majority being sacrificed on the altar of human achievement in order to achieve the perfection of the State (the ‘ultimate expression of the ethical idea’) and reflect the glory of the supreme leader.

Divinities tend to hate the idea that there is anything above them deserving of greater adulation. At the highest levels the divinity of men is abstracted to become the divinity of mankind and there is no limit to the number of individual ‘divinities’ that can be sacrificed in pursuit of this aim.

Marx, the apostate Jew whose family supposedly converted to Christianity, is to be congratulated for his miraculous exposition of a political-economy that somehow manages to reflect the material requirements of the religious and philosophical assumptions of the Kabbalah. The result has been presented as his own work of secular genius; in fact it is nothing of the sort.

Jean-Paul Sartre is guilty of the exact same thing: his most famous work, Being And Nothingness, amends Hegel to produce nothing less than a philosophical exposition of the Kabbalah’s cosmogony, disguised by some of the most deliberately and unnecessarily dense prose ever put to paper. Even a cursory examination of the Kabbalah’s cosmogony and Sartre’s ‘existentialism’ soon reveals that they’re identical. Sartre’s claim that there is a ‘nothingness at the heart of being’ and that human consciousness ‘is this distinguishing nothingness’ is the philosophical counterpart to the Kabbalah’s assertion that being did not emerge from non-being but from the ‘divine essence’.

And Sartre’s basic message? That nothing defines man but man himself. We cannot blame anything external to ourselves for our predicament because we can create our own reality:

That Being should arise from non-being is impossible. That matter should create itself is absurd; matter cannot proceed from Spirit; the two words mean that the two ideas are entirely apart; then matter cannot exist. Hence it follows that what we call matter is but an aspect, a conception, an illusion, a mode of motion, a delusion of our physical senses.." --Worshipful Master Wynn Westcott: An Introduction to the Study of the Kabbalah

Despite Sartre’s divine folly – he subsequently embraced Marxism – tens of thousands lined the streets of Paris to witness his funeral procession, a final opportunity to worship the fish-eyed divinity. Sartre himself let the cat out of the bag just before his death during an interview conducted by his assistant, Benny Lévy, to whom he admitted his ‘interest’ in Judaism and Jewish history. Sartre reportedly stated that: "The Jew lives. He has a destiny. The finality towards which every Jew moves is to reunite humanity . . . It is the end that only the Jewish people know…It is the beginning of the existence of men for each other."

Well, what a surprise!

What is existentialism? It has been called the most significant and influential philosophy of the 20th Century, and with good reason. The basic underlying premise - that man can and must create, amend, heal and save himself – is now the core philosophy of all the social sciences and, increasingly, of the natural sciences too, now that the dogma of man-made global warming is firmly established as scientific ‘fact’.

This is not to suggest that Sartre, Marx or any other single individual is responsible for secular humanism, or to deny that secular humanism has much earlier roots. That would be absurd. Rather, it is my contention that these views have been fostered, sponsored and supported by Freemasons, and in many notable cases actually produced by them. Existing –ism’s,–ologies and –tions that conflict with the new philosophy are redefined, yet the labels are retained and their continued use defended as valid and consistent even though the new definitions are the very opposite of the original meanings; hostile to them in fact.

This reflects the basic approach outlined earlier in this thread: the ‘evolutionary’ revolution of those that subvert from within by presenting themselves as the most orthodox and committed defenders of the existing order, all the while doing their utmost to undermine it.

Thus have these ideas been elevated to their current standing as the axioms of Western civilisation. They have been carefully distilled over time, becoming ever purer until they match the rigorous standards of the source: the Kabbalah and its medium of choice, Freemasonry.

Freemasonry’s core aim is to introduce (infect would be a more appropriate term) its morals and dogmas into mainstream society. Just as Freemasonry’s Karl Marx, Albert Pike, reminds us of The Craft’s interest in bringing into being the promise of the "Great Revolution of the Ages" he also tells us that "[i]t hatches no premature revolutions" but strives instead to achieve a feat that only the utopian can acknowledge as possible and desirable: "…recognizing the great truth that freedom follows fitness for freedom as the corollary follows the axiom, it strives to prepare men to govern themselves."

Think about this last phrase. Don’t for a minute think that Pike is referring to the self-rule or self-determination of a nation in the form of representative government. His statement is to be taken literally: we are to govern ourselves. We see this idea in Common Purpose, the organisation that precipitated my identification as a ‘Conspiraloon’. This organisation tells us that we must ignore recognised and established boundaries and authorities in order to lead beyond them: Leading Beyond Authority. We are to create the rules. Established authorities are inconsistent with the requirements of the new faith and its social, economic and political manifestations and must be undermined. This is a cancer eating away at the heart of society.

And why would any group wish to create conditions that can only lead to society’s collapse I hear you ask? How would you define the term ‘revolution’? Something similar to "a drastic and far-reaching change in ways of thinking and behaving" perhaps?

What does Pike tell us about the methods of Freemasonry?

Masonry, like all the Religions, all the Mysteries, Hermeticism and Alchemy, conceals its secrets from all except the Adepts and Sages, or the Elect, and uses false explanations and misinterpretations of its symbols to mislead those who deserve only to be misled; to conceal the Truth, which it calls Light, from them, and to draw them away from it. Truth is not for those who are unworthy or unable to receive it, or would pervert it. So God Himself incapacitates many men, by color-blindness, to distinguish colors, and leads the masses away from the highest Truth, giving them the power to attain only so much of it as it is profitable to them to know. Every age has had a religion suited to its capacity. The Teachers, even of Christianity, are, in general, the most ignorant of the true meaning of that which they teach. There is no book of which so little is known as the Bible. To most who read it, it is as incomprehensible as the Sohar. So Masonry jealously conceals its secrets…

Here Pike is telling us that the Adepts mislead both the public at large and those at the lower levels of Freemasonry itself. For the most part the ordinary Freemason is just the ordinary man on the street, content to learn enough and no more. He receives light enough to enable him to further the aims of Freemasonry and to do so in the belief that its aim is that of improving the existing state of affairs. By contrast, those that demonstrate 'worthiness' through their own curiosity and endeavour progress through the degrees and are gradually acclimatised to the truth. What Pike is also telling us is that, for Freemasons, the established religions are nothing more than crude representations of their own, devices to blind the unworthy to a light they are not yet ready to receive.

Pike tells us that it is Masonry's duty to:

...assist in elevating the moral and intellectual level of society; in coining knowledge, bringing ideas into circulation, and causing the mind of youth to grow; and in putting, gradually, by the teachings of axioms and the promulgation of positive laws, the human race in harmony with its destinies.

Yet at one and the same time we're told that the Mason must not discuss 'The Craft' with 'profane' non-Masons! How, then, is the Mason to promulgate the axioms of Masonry to the profane? The answer is simple: by using whatever position he holds in the non-Masonic world to inject these ideas into 'secular' society.

Common Purpose is an organisation that exists for the sole purpose of injecting Masonic ideas - cloaked in 'secular' language - into civil society.

Everything happening today reflects the progress of man towards a state in which he is ready to receive the Masonic ‘truth’. We are clearly getting ever nearer to this point, which is why Masonic ‘truths’ are now being made available to the public at large, albeit in a form that prevents the public from appreciating their true origin. It is for this reason that the Kabbalah's emergence from obscurity, and an exclusive association with Judaism and esotericism, is so significant.

The Masonic light is like night-vision: for those provided with the means to harness it the terrain is as bright as day; for those without pitch black.

Most secular humanists are stumbling about in the darkness.

There is no contradiction in identifying a whole series of –ism’s as reflections of Freemasonry and the Kabbalah. Rather, their utility to ‘both’ (they are one and the same) is identical to the utility of the ‘different’ faiths and a perfect reflection of the tradition’s willingness to accept any and all beliefs and philosophies provided their foundations do not rest on assumptions different to that of its own.

These people regard Christianity and Islam as ‘the enemy’ not because they are dogmas but because they are genuinely different dogmas. The other main religions, chiefly Hinduism, Sikhism and Buddhism, are unproblematic because they share with the Kabbalah a common origin in eastern esotericism.

This is the true meaning of the ‘harmony in difference’ preached by the United Nations and so zealously implemented by our legislators: different shells containing the same kernel of ‘truth’, providing the illusion of difference without the conflict and antagonism associated with a genuine plurality of belief, opinion and custom.

Freemasonry is the Kabbalah wrapped in a cloak of familiar Western concepts, such as Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. Freemasonry is the medium through which the Kabbalah has infiltrated Western societies. The Kabbalah is what passes for Judaism for ‘those who call themselves Jews but are not’, those Jews that have - once again - set aside their own religious tradition and seem destined to repeat the mistakes of the past – all of which are based on the original mistake – over and over again.

God commanded man, man ignored the commandment; man became God.

The truth of the New World Order is identical to Sartre’s death-bed confession. As the New World Order gathers pace and we are all propagandised, chided, hounded and criminalised until we fit one generic mould another Sartrean truth will no doubt spring to mind: "Hell is other people".

Common Purpose: A Masonic NWO Front?

2007-10-28T12:55:00.000Z

Four weeks ago I posted an article highlighting strange parallels between Common Purpose's logo and other symbols common to Freemasonry, Zionism and, rather bizarrely, the Bank of England's recently issued new £20 note*. The symbol in question was the Star of David, within which can also be seen a circle (i.e sun) within a triangle (i.e. pyramid), both of which are Masonic symbols. Given that the partisan and secretive nature of these organisations sits rather uneasily with Common Purpose's claim to be 'balanced' and "...owe no historical or other allegiance to any other group"** I decided to write to them and pose the following question: "...I found myself wondering whether the Star of David was accidental or intentional. Can you confirm, as stated, that your organisation owes "...no historical or other allegiance to any other group..."

*Or perhaps not: these symbols are also found on the infamous US $1 dollar bill and the Great Seal of the United States.

**Although it fits Common Purpose's commitment to the secretive Chatham House Rule, which militates against openness and accountability.

To date I have not received a response to this enquiry and do not expect to receive one. In the four weeks that have elapsed, however, it seems that Common Purpose's UK website has been re-designed. This is interesting because although the logo is retained it is very much less prominent and has been rendered in a single color, thus making it considerably more difficult to spot the symbols in question. Where the original colourised logo is retained it is small in comparison with the original main logo, again making it difficult for anyone other than the keen-eyed or those who know what to look for to spot. These points aside, there is another peculiar feature of the Common Purpose logo, which is definitely not coincidental and, to my mind, makes it clear that Common Purpose is a Masonic New World Order front organisation. What is it? Well, look at the below images and compare the Common Purpose logo with the symbol associated with the 33rd Degree of Scottish Rite Freemasonry: in all important respects the two are identical!

This is important, and not only because it demonstrates a link between Common Purpose and Freemasonry. Many believe that attainment of the 33rd Degree confers entry to a super-secret organisation of 'illuminated ones', commonly refered to as the Illuminati, for whom the number 33 has special significance. In Masonic imagery, the 33rd Degree is represented by the well-know Eye of Horus (aka the All-Seeing Eye), which sits atop a pyramid (a structure representing an organisational hierarchy) and radiates sunlight (i.e. illuminates) all around. The light in question represents secular human knowledge and the Illuminati's intention to replace the world's existing belief systems with its own, as part of an on-going plan to introduce an unelected and unaccountable system of global governance, commonly referred to as the New World Order (or Novus Ordo Seclorum - New Order of the Ages).

Although use of the word 'replace' is certainly justified, the actual method employed is that of the parasite: invade the host organism, subvert it and make it work for you, and do so without changing the organism's outward appearance. This is happening at all levels: 'multi-faith' worship and the increasing use of New Age terminology, the hijacking of the nation-state by bodies such as the EU and UN, and the promotion of 'tolerance' and 'diversity', all of which are intended to undermine existing belief systems and social norms (genuine liberalism, representative government, the separate doctrines of the major religions, heterosexuality, masculinity and femininity - the list is endless) and demonise those who adhere to them as fanatics and bigots. Common Purpose are quite open in their commitment to this process and state that "[v]ery few people emerge from Common Purpose with their prejudices* - or working practices - unchanged."

*Here, we need to be aware that use of the term 'prejudices' in fact refers to existing beliefs deemed incompatible with the coming New World Order rather than prejudices in the pejorative sense.

It is also important to note the words that form part of the 33rd Degree symbol: Ordo Ab Chao meaning Order From (or out of) Chaos. The traditional interpretation of this is that the friendly Masons help provide order and structure in a chaotic world. The actual meaning is quite the opposite: they create the chaos that is required to justify the imposition of their own very specific form of order. Consider Iraq for example: we are supposed to believe that two of the world's leading statesmen (both educated at their country's leading universities) waded into Iraq without a workable plan for managing the post-combat 'transition to democracy'. This belief is based on the assumption that the war was a spur-of-the-moment affair initiated by 911 and concerns about Weapons of Mass Destruction, although all the evidence indicates otherwise - that the war was being planned even prior to 911. The real reason Iraq is now in chaos is because it was planned that way: in order to impose the desired form of rule the planners need a 'peacetime' environment of fear and terror, producing a brutalised and fearful population only too willing to accept their 'solution' to the 'problem'*. This is the real meaning of Ordo Ab Chao.

*Think this is impossible? All the planners had to do was bomb Iraq's infrastructure (utility providers, etc.) and dismiss all members of the Ba'ath Party (i.e. all public sector workers plus the police and armed forces) then sit back and do nothing while the country descended into anarchy. This was not a 'policy failure' - it was deliberately and cynically planned and executed.

But what has Iraq to do with Common Purpose you might ask? Well, in its own way Common Purpose is doing with 'training' and 'education' what the US/UK coalition did in Iraq with bombs and mass dismissals: undermining the ability of local and national government, charities and major businesses to do their jobs effectively, and by definition undermining the political, cultural and socio-economic foundations of the countries in which they operate. Consider the following quote from the Common Purpose website:

"We have a fundamental belief in the power of diversity. This stems from a conviction that real - and sustainable - answers only emerge when the widest range of viewpoints come together. So, when we recruit participants to any of our programmes, we deliberately bring together people from different sectors, professions, backgrounds and positions."

As mentioned in my post Diversity in the Peoples Republic of Great Britain, diversity training has nothing to do with effectiveness and economic competitiveness and everything to do with breaking down people's 'prejudices' (i.e. existing beliefs) and replacing them with new, NWO-friendly beliefs such as tolerance for everything and anything except traditional standards and existing social, cultural and religious norms. This is achieved by the use of shaming tactics designed to tar existing beliefs and moral standards with labels such as 'racism' and 'homophobia', thereby ensuring that the recipient of diversity training is sensitised to the needs of diverse cultures, groups and practices to the detriment of those of his own. Far from ensuring equality it militates against it by subtly assigning an elevated status to certain cultures and beliefs and ensuring that the diversity training recipient is unconsciously primed to give them priority.

Additionally, a visit to the Common Purpose website soon reveals the use of deliberately vague, jargon-laden language of the sort modern managers love and which, 'coincidentally', is one of the reasons few organisations operate effectively these days. Here is just a sample of the meaningless net 'benefits' of Common Purpose training, which helps 'leaders to: "...deliver quality...expect complexity and produce clarity... anticipate interconnectivity and find common ground...develop diverse networks which help them see angles and opportunities...". Should we be surprised that local and national governments are soaking up all the tax money we can throw at them and producing little or nothing in return when public servants are raised on a diet of this rubbish? Should we be surprised to hears of cuts in the quality and quantity of local and national services despite government's massive financial investment? This criminal waste and inefficiency is no accident: the policies driving the process are intended to produce these outcomes. The ultimate intention is to create a state of affairs in which nothing works in order to ensure that the exasperated population accepts the 'solution' that will eventually be offered, even if the solution means that those in positions of power are no longer elected and accountable but those who 'lead beyond their authority'.

In modern parlance Common Purpose is a 'change-agent'. In reality, it is a front organisation driven by a secretive elite that needs to create chaos in British society in order to reconstruct it in its own image. The only question is whether those running this organisation are willing and informed fellow-travellers or dupes of powerful groups operating behind-the-scenes.

Diversity in the Peoples Republic of Great Britain

2007-10-23T18:27:00.000+01:00

I came across this video, for which we must thank our good friends Common Purpose, while trawling the Internet yesterday. And what a little gem it is! Business leaders and senior police and army figures are shown appreciating the values of Sikh temples, contemporary dance groups, children’s rescue centres and sundry other ‘diverse’ environments and cultures. But for what purpose, beyond the common purpose that Common Purpose itself seems remarkably reluctant to reveal? Does anybody seriously believe that this nonsense actually contributes to the effectiveness of the organisations that swallow it, or that the organisations in question operate on a basis that actually permits the appreciation of ‘diverse’ cultural and religious backgrounds?

One of the most notable features of all organisations, be they businesses or the police and armed services, is that they are hierarchical and specialised. Although it may be true that in some contexts, such as Customer Services, it is desirable to have an appreciation of the values of one’s customer base, more often than not one’s cultural and religious background is irrelevant in the modern workplace. Many companies certainly wish to give the impression that they listen to the views of their employees, but in practice employees know only too well that what is expected of them, and what will bring them promotion and praise, is adherence to the line laid down by their superiors. Real diversity, in the form of individualism, is positively frowned upon.

The small number of companies that do actually listen to their employees do so only on the basis of their employees technical expertise, or to meet requests for improvements to amenities and so on. For example, certain car manufacturers may require their employees to submit two proposals per year, but they do so in the expectation that the proposals will aid efficiency and increase productivity. As such, they are singularly uninterested in their employees’ cultural or religious prejudices, which when overtly paraded are more hindrance than help. One might argue that this is an area in which an appreciation of diversity could be of use, although the real point is that organisations operate – or at least should operate - on an impersonal basis. In other words, we should be required to leave our beliefs and prejudices at the factory gate.

In this sense, an organisation’s effectiveness breaks down as soon as these personal considerations are allowed to become part and parcel of its employees’ work-life. The rules of the business game are best represented by the Latin phrase sine ira et studio, meaning “without ill will or favour”. Once this principle is abandoned the rules of the game break down, because the organisation’s employees can no longer be relied upon to act impartially, either amongst themselves or towards the people they serve. In fact, all organisations tend to have their own esprit de corp, which - traditionally at least - employees have been expected to adopt and make their own. It is this uniformity and obligation to follow a single set of values and rules that provides an organisation with its strength and cohesiveness, not a mishmash of individual cultural and religious assumptions that have no direct bearing on the tasks at hand.

It is a fact that ‘diversity training’ is based on the assumption that organisations can benefit internally from the diverse cultural backgrounds of their employees. But is this really the case? Does the Sikh engineer help his company succeed on the basis of his own cultural and religious background or his knowledge of engineering? Is there some uniquely gay value that enables the homosexual computer programmer to write better code than his heterosexual counterpart? Is the civil servant more or less likely to act impartially on the basis of sine ira et studio or by feeling obliged, by virtue of his diversity training, to apply different criteria to those who do not share his cultural background*? Would accommodating the diverse cultural values of police officers and soldiers bolster or undermine the operational effectiveness, morale and chain of command of the police and armed services?

*And this is exactly what happens. Prior to receiving diversity training Civil Servants have no personal interest in the identity or background of those they serve, and this impartiality ensures that all are treated alike. By contrast, diversity training attunes Civil Servants to differences and virtually guarantees that certain groups will be afforded special treatment.

The answers to these questions are more than obvious, and the claim that most organisations need or indeed want their employees to bring their diverse cultural and religious views into the workplace is as false as the fact that the vast majority of companies deliver diversity training only because government legislation requires them to do so is true. Diversity training has had to be forced on companies because there are no actual benefits to be derived from it. Were this not the case organisations would already have recognised the competitive benefits and implemented their own diversity programs, without the need for government legislation. This should make us aware that politics, rather than good business acumen, is the motive force behind the current obsession with diversity training.

Once we accept that the vast majority of organisations are simply fulfilling their legal obligations rather than actively ‘embracing’ diversity, we’re obliged to recognise the fact that diversity brings no organisational or economic benefits. Having recognised this, we’re obliged to ask why this legislation targets organisations rather than individuals. Here, we must recognise that employees are accustomed to mandatory training, team-building and workshop exercises and are likely to view diversity training in the same light. Accordingly, very few will ever question why they are required to undergo diversity training, let alone question the legislation and assumptions behind it. If we accept that diversity training brings no direct benefit to the organisation then the only possible conclusion is that the legislation is really intended to target the individual, the organisation being simply the medium through which the message is delivered.

The point is this: were government to pass legislation requiring every private citizen to attend mandatory diversity training then every private citizen would see this for what it is: communist-style political re-education. By targeting the organisation rather than the individual the government performs a sleight-of-hand trick, because employees will regard the training as ‘just part of the job’ and never question its true purpose. And what is its true purpose? Well, when was the last time you attended, or indeed heard of, diversity training predicated on encouraging ethnic minorities to accept, embrace and appreciate British culture and its Judaeo-Christian heritage? Why is diversity training very often geared towards subtly shaming white Anglo-Saxons for being members of the ‘dominant’ – and by implication ‘oppressive’ – culture? Why do facilitators of diversity training attempt to induce cognitive dissonance and encourage participants to ‘confess’ (i.e. by providing examples of occasions on which they may have inadvertently practised discrimination), such methods being the basic tools of the brain-washer?

The real question, however, is this: if undermining British culture and society is the purpose then what is the reason? This question cannot be divorced from the wider context of the on-going onslaught against the nation-state, family, heterosexuality, masculinity and femininity, and the core values of our Judaeo-Christian heritage. This in turn must be viewed in the context of globalisation and the insidious match towards regional and global governance and its totalitarian creed of tolerance. The aforementioned values stand as impediments to this New World Order, in which we must accept every ‘way of being human’ (as sociologists like to put it) or be branded hate criminals, racists, bigots and fanatics. The intended aim is to produce a mishmash of cultures and values amenable to a system of global governance and a standardised set of rules acceptable to a homogenised populace*. This is the real purpose behind the diversity drive: not to produce actual diversity but uniformity, an environment in which those with real principles and values can be readily identified and targeted, shamed and corrected.

*Its homogeneity lies in the fact that it will be required to accept everything and conditioned to hold no strong convictions other than the single overarching conviction that every lifestyle choice and value system is equally relative and thus equally valid. Paradoxically, the only non-relative value system is that of the globalisers and their tolerance agenda.

Diversity training is just one element of a plan to mimic at the global level what the individual organisation achieves at the micro-social level: a uniform set of rules and esprit de corp enforced by rewards for those who wag their tails and disciplinary procedures for those who don’t. Just don't expect to be able to walk away from it at evenings and weekends.

The European Parliament: Communist Political Theatre

2007-10-06T12:10:00.000+01:00

When you think about it, the internal structure and layout of a building can tell us much about the purpose for which it is intended. Consider for example the internal layout of a theatre: tiers of stalls surround a main stage and it is clear that the design facilitates the purpose, which is that of delivering a performance for the benefit of an audience. The internal layout is designed to focus the audience's attention on the stage, which is important because a theatre is not designed for the purpose of allowing communication between the performers and the audience. Certainly audiences can be vocal at times, but only in the context of registering their approval or disassatisfaction: they are not actually part of the production and have no control over the script or the production values. In this sense audiences are to all intents and purposes passive reviewers of a spectacle over which they have very limited control.

With this in mind, consider the UK Parliament and ask yourself what the internal layout has to say about its purpose and function. Unlike a theatre, in which our attention is draw to a main stage, the 'audience' is separated into two blocks, a fact that speaks volumes about the purpose for which it was constructed. Look at the picture and the words that spring to mind are 'opposition' and 'conflict', reflecting the fact that the UK Parliament is designed to facilitate a verbal war between opposing factions, with all the debate and rancour this entails. In this environment no one individual or group of individuals can be the main focus point, and the 'stage' and 'stalls' shift as each speaker stands to express his or her point or contend with the previous speaker. As such, Parliament is a perfect reflection of the British political tradition: single-party government that can be held to account by Parliament and removed from power by the people.

Next consider the layout of the European Parliament, known as the hemicycle. What words spring to mind when you look at the picture? Opposition and conflict? Certainly not! Debate and discussion? Hardly, given that MEPs are alloted just 60 seconds per debate to represent the interests of hundreds of thousands of constituents. In fact, the layout of tiers surrounding a stage suggests something else entirely, something well suited to a body well-known for poor attendance (audiences tend to vote with their feet) and rubber stamping legislation by means of a show of hands or push of a button. The European Parliament is laid out as it is because the European Parliament is a theatre, and like any other theatre the audience has only two possible choices: to clap or boo the production as it sees fit. As such, it has no real power vis-a-vis the EU executive: it can neither hold the executive to account nor permit the people to vote the executive out of office. Given that the Parliament's procedures guarantee that it is unable to represent the interests of its constituents, it is clear that it has only one real purpose; that of lending pseudo-democratic legitimacy to the EU edifice as a whole.

Of course, Pro-Europeans react in horror to such accusations, claiming that members of the Council of Ministers and European Council are also democratically elected by the electorates of their respective member-states. They certainly are elected, but on a national rather than European basis: the Council of Ministers and European Council have no democratic legitimacy per se in the context of the European Union (which is, lest we forget, a state in its own right with its own system of government and its own citizens). Moreover, in final form the EU is to be a union of the peoples of Europe organised into regions rather than countries. In the EU universe Scotland and Wales exist as regions and now have their own 'national' (i.e. regional) assemblies. England does not exist at all: in its place are regions designated South East, South West, etc., managed and co-ordinated by Regional Development Agencies. As things stand, therefore, citizens of a fully-realised European Union will be unable to choose or remove their EU masters and must content themselves with 'representation' in the European Parliament and regional assemblies, which are themselves EU entities reflecting EU constituency boundaries.

What, then, is the European Parliament? Is it really any different from, say, the Chinese Parliament pictured below, which - coincidentally of course - also resembles an amphitheatre? Has it any more power over the EU government than the Chinese Parliament has over the Chinese government? Do the Chinese people vote for a local representative (who in turn votes for a national representative) knowing that their vote can result in a change of administration and a new beginning? Or do they do so knowing that their vote is just a charade, part of a system designed to allow their unelected rulers to claim that the system is 'democratic'? Does this not mirror our own situation vis-a-vis the European Union, an entity run by powerful unelected technocrats and political figures that have no democratic mandate to operate collectively at the EU level and cannot be held to account or removed from office by the 'citizens' of the EU?

The structure of the European Parliament is a perfect reflection of its purpose: instead of conflict, debate, government, opposition and accountability we have a disparate group of looslely organised coalitions applauding or booing the thousands of scripts authored by the real EU powers - the Council of Ministers, European Council and Commission. And how alike these scripts are! Social cohesion, solidarity, common purpose, diversity and harmonisation feature heavily, whereas the real features of a good political system, features such as accountability, transparency and the ability to remove a crooked or ineffective government are nowhere to be found.

Consider the following extracts from the opening session of the Parliament:

"Social harmony and stability as well as a better life are the aspiration of all the people and an important goal for the work of the government"

"It's government's responsibility to serve the people and address their concerns. We'll see how government implements its promises to achieve social harmony...[and build a society based on]...democracy, rule of law, equity, sincerity, fraternity, vitality, stability and the harmony of human and nature"

This is of course just what we've come to expect from the EU. The only problem is this: the above quotes were taken from the opening session of the Chinese parliament! And the point is: would you have guessed?

The Common Purpose of Common Purpose

2007-10-03T20:32:00.000+01:00

Visitors to the Common Purpose website may be perplexed to find that the site provides no information whatsoever as regards the common purpose of Common Purpose. This rather glaring omission - no doubt the real goodies are tucked away in the secure area of the site reserved for 'graduates' only - is curious to say the least and obliges us to reconstruct the organisation's real objectives by analysing the limited amount of information released into the public domain. Proof that there is such an objective can be found in a testimonial provided by Sylvia Moss, in which we're informed that she: "...met people from all walks of life with totally different perspectives and experience but a common purpose - the organisation is certainly aptly named!" With this in mind, I present below a number of extracts from the first chapter of Common Purpose founder Julia Middleton's book, Beyond Authority: Leadership in a Changing World, together with some brief commentary and analysis.

In a jaw-dropping opening page, the following extracts are most noteworthy:

"The opportunities (and threats) ahead will not come neatly parceled to fit the department, or division, or sector, or culture, or even country into which we have arranged ourselves. They will cross boundaries and come through walls – and our leaders need to be able to do this too. (p.3)"

Subtext: it would be desirable to remove these boundaries altogether, boundaries such as the nation-state's 'irksome' right to self-determination and sovereignty (the sole right to exercise power in a given geographical area).

"This requires leaders who are prepared to challenge the “butt out” culture that tells everyone to “stick to their knitting” and stop interfering where they don’t belong. Leaders who can take responsibility for problems other than their own, both within organizations and in society at large. Leaders who can still lead when their legitimacy is constantly in question...[w]e need to give them the confidence they need to legitimize themselves and challenge the old ways." (p.3)

In other words, it is both possible and desirable for leaders to lead without authority and to continue to do so even in the face of mass dissent derived from their lack of authority. The only legitimacy such leaders require is their own sense of confidence in the 'rightness' of their actions. Existing outside the 'confines' of traditional structures of authority, such leaders are unaccountable to those they lead.

"It’s not about having authority but choosing not to use it; it’s about having no authority at all (and sometimes less than that). It’s about earning legitimacy with ideas that resonate – and an approach to leadership that means people end up willingly granting authority to you." (p.4)

And what does this approach to leadership actually amount to? Is it based on an appeal to reason and justice or on techniques intended to manipulate people into accepting a pre-planned consensus and marginalise dissenters? Middleton's own approach to leadership is demonstrated in a speech given to the South West Regional Development Agency: "The other day I was in a meeting in Belfast, I have no idea how I ended up in this meeting. It was a really wonderful meeting with about fifteen people there. When we were really getting going there was this little jerk in the corner, who kept piping out "What is your legitimacy?" and we all said "just shut up" and we kept on going."

The following extracts are from pages 8 and 9 of Middleton's book and share a common theme:

"[Leaders] know that, however excellent their organization becomes, if other organizations are not going in the same direction, none of them will succeed. So organizations need their leaders to connect with the outside world." (p.8)

"If the message is to be got across and the outside world is to be reconciled with yours, the communication has to be direct." (p.8)

"[Civil society] needs these leaders. Not simply as representatives of organizations that need to connect with the outside world, but as individual citizens in their own right. We all live in society – and society needs the brains and abilities of all of us if it is to run well. Democracy is not just about voting every few years and then whingeing in the intervening period about politicians not being able to run the place properly. We all need to engage as citizens. Some will do it by entering politics. Others will do it by standing up as leaders of civil society. But we all need to be involved." (p.8)

"I well remember going to meet the leader of Manchester City Council about three years after I had started Common Purpose. As I walked in, he welcomed me with: “I would-n’t have let you into my office two years ago.”. He explained that when he had been elected leader of the city two years before, he was determined that, through his own civil leadership, he would produce huge change. And he had. Manchester was on a roll, a big roll. You could feel it wherever you went. But now he recognized that, to go further, he needed others. That he would need all leaders of civil society, all over Manchester, to help." (p.9)

The most interesting points here are: the emphasis on organisations and society moving in the same direction; the idea that it is the outside world that must reconcile itself to the world of the leader; the focus on facilitating the development of all organs of society in line with a common objective (as defined by the leader); and the completely contradictory approach towards participation and civil society, in which the need for us 'all' to participate is in fact a need for leaders to participate and the rest of us to go along as passive fellow-travelers.

These points aside, it’s interesting to note that Middleton’s focus on cross-cutting boundaries and horizontal and vertical power relationships and networks evokes the dialectic. Although commonly referred to in simple “thesis – antithesis – synthesis” terms, the dialectic is in fact far more sophisticated: it is more appropriate to speak of dialectics within dialectics (operating within a single overarching dialectic), each having subtle interconnections in terms of both time and space. In this sense, the dialectic is to sociology what the Butterfly Effect is to quantum physics, and it goes without saying that it serves to legitimate control over just about everything in the socio-economic and political spheres. From this perspective, if everything is interconnected and contingent then it is only right and proper for government to have a finger in every pie, from the hurricane itself all the way down to the butterfly that caused it.

Who or what is behind Common Purpose?

2007-10-02T22:47:00.000+01:00

Those who keep their nose close to the New World Order grindstone have probably noticed that the 'net is currently awash - relatively speaking - with articles about a previously unheard of organisation, Common Purpose. This charity, headed and founded by Julia Middleton, had until recently close ties with the now-defunct Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM), and aims to fill civil society:

"...with as many people as possible - and to give them the knowledge, inspiration and networks they need to be effective. To encourage all kinds of people into it - and to see all kinds of initiatives come out of it. To discover new leaders in the bustling crowd - and to show the lone voices that they are not alone...[and]... develop leaders who can lead beyond their authority, beyond their direct circle of control. Who can lead networks as well as organisations. Who can produce change even when they can't instruct or elicit trust in familiar ways. Who can sustain broader perspectives and who are confident in making connections between quite different groups of people and reconciling different worlds."

The organisation peddles its training programmes to politicians, civil servants and business leaders at all levels, and other commentators have already identified the rather scary implications associated with the idea that such people should be encouraged to 'lead beyond their authority', the organisation's links to the European Union, its adherence to the secretive and undemocratic Chatham House Rule and, in the case of Brian Gerrish, what happens when someone wishes to pursue their own, rather than a 'common', purpose. These points aside, is there anything else about Common Purpose that might lead us to regard it as highly suspect, or even another NWO front?

During a recent visit to the Common Purpose website my eye was drawn immediately to their rather peculiar logo, which very much reminded me of an equally peculiar feature of the new £20 note issued only few weeks ago. Both images are reproduced below and raise a number of intriguing questions.

The sharp-eyed will notice immediately that both images are identical: the Common Purpose logo is simply a stylised version of the image found on the new £20 note. Looking more closely, it is evident that both images contain the Star of David, a symbol intimately associated with Israel, Zionism and Freemasonry.

In the context of Common Purpose, the question is this: why on earth would such symbols be incorporated in the logo of an organisation whose Charter states that it is balanced and owes no historical or other allegiance to any other group? Needless to say, it's even more pertinent to question why the supposedly independent Bank of England would place the national symbol of a foreign power on an English banknote, just to the left of the Queen herself?

Feeling somewhat mischievous, this author decided to find out for himself by going straight to the horse's mouth and posing the question via a form on the Common Purpose website. The text of my enquiry is reproduced below:

"Very interesting site. My eyes were drawn immediately to your logo and I found myself wondering whether the Star of David was accidental or intentional. Can you confirm, as stated, that your organisation owes "...no historical or other allegiance to any other group..."

I posted this yesterday and am intrigued to find out how they'll respond, if at all...