-
Articles/Ads
Article THE "TABLET" versus THE BISHOPS. ← Page 3 of 4 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
The "Tablet" Versus The Bishops.
Our learned solon of the press has ventured to pronounce Freemasonry to be "illegal" in the face of several acts of parliament against secret societies and combinations by oath , in ivhich Freemasonry is specially excepted , which , as a lawyer he ought to have known . If they are prohibited in a few countries , they are protected in most others . The late king of Prussia , some years ago , instituted an enquiry into the principles of Freemasonry in his dominionsancl finding all conformable to good
, morals and the laws , their order is to this clay under royal protection . The Abbe Barruel , who is no slight authority , exempts British Freemasons from the charges he has raked up against the continental combinations . In one of his latter volumes he gives a most romantic account of his own initiation in a Loclge of Freemasons ( totally against his own inclination ) after dinner certainl y most improbable , because contrary to all masonic law and . Hehoweveracknowled that he
conusage , , ges tinued to frequent the lodge from time to time , until he had passed through three degrees . After this he turns round upon his friends , ancl denounces them in certain assumed subsequent degrees he never entered ; a circumstance which at least lays him open to charges alleged by some writers of meanness , deception , if not of falsehood and ingratitude to the friends who initiated him into the three first degrees . He then asserts upon hearsay , without affording proofs , " that in the subsequent degrees
" the mask was withdrawn , and Masonry became a war against Christ " and his altars , against kings and their thrones , hating Christ and his "religion , and detesting all sovereignty and power except that of the " people . " AVithout entering into a labyrinth of discussion for the purpose of contradicting a man of his character for piety and goodness , I must content myself with the inference , that his zeal to do imaginary good overcame his discretion . But I will askwithout fear of
contra-, diction , is there a bishop , priest , or layman to be found who can believe that the late great Lord Petre , or the late lamented Duke of Sussex , Grand Master of England , or any one among the hundreds of time-honoured names to be met with in the annals of British Masonry , ever promulgated or professed such abominable doctrines ? There are many such strange incongruities to be found in the "Memoirs of Jacobinism , " ivhich the limits of this letter forbid me to enumerate .
My printer , a Roman Catholic , declined , after so much had been written , and remained partly uncontradicted , to publish the pamphlet , when informed that the subject was a plea for Freemasonry , lest he might have the support of himself and family taken from him . To him I attach no blame ; but such a system of coercion is truly deplorable among Roman Catholics .
The following letter I have lately received from the publisher of a Roman Catholic periodical , returning half a guinea with my advertisement of Letter the Second , before a word of it had been submitted to judgment , which has since been done;—Nov . 18 , 1814 . "Sir , —As I anticipated , the advertisement of the letters on Freemasonry is not considered unobjectionable in . . . . as it is said , they
call in question a decision of the Holy See . I therefore beg to return , & c . " Yours most truly , . " The above astute assumption I deny .
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
The "Tablet" Versus The Bishops.
Our learned solon of the press has ventured to pronounce Freemasonry to be "illegal" in the face of several acts of parliament against secret societies and combinations by oath , in ivhich Freemasonry is specially excepted , which , as a lawyer he ought to have known . If they are prohibited in a few countries , they are protected in most others . The late king of Prussia , some years ago , instituted an enquiry into the principles of Freemasonry in his dominionsancl finding all conformable to good
, morals and the laws , their order is to this clay under royal protection . The Abbe Barruel , who is no slight authority , exempts British Freemasons from the charges he has raked up against the continental combinations . In one of his latter volumes he gives a most romantic account of his own initiation in a Loclge of Freemasons ( totally against his own inclination ) after dinner certainl y most improbable , because contrary to all masonic law and . Hehoweveracknowled that he
conusage , , ges tinued to frequent the lodge from time to time , until he had passed through three degrees . After this he turns round upon his friends , ancl denounces them in certain assumed subsequent degrees he never entered ; a circumstance which at least lays him open to charges alleged by some writers of meanness , deception , if not of falsehood and ingratitude to the friends who initiated him into the three first degrees . He then asserts upon hearsay , without affording proofs , " that in the subsequent degrees
" the mask was withdrawn , and Masonry became a war against Christ " and his altars , against kings and their thrones , hating Christ and his "religion , and detesting all sovereignty and power except that of the " people . " AVithout entering into a labyrinth of discussion for the purpose of contradicting a man of his character for piety and goodness , I must content myself with the inference , that his zeal to do imaginary good overcame his discretion . But I will askwithout fear of
contra-, diction , is there a bishop , priest , or layman to be found who can believe that the late great Lord Petre , or the late lamented Duke of Sussex , Grand Master of England , or any one among the hundreds of time-honoured names to be met with in the annals of British Masonry , ever promulgated or professed such abominable doctrines ? There are many such strange incongruities to be found in the "Memoirs of Jacobinism , " ivhich the limits of this letter forbid me to enumerate .
My printer , a Roman Catholic , declined , after so much had been written , and remained partly uncontradicted , to publish the pamphlet , when informed that the subject was a plea for Freemasonry , lest he might have the support of himself and family taken from him . To him I attach no blame ; but such a system of coercion is truly deplorable among Roman Catholics .
The following letter I have lately received from the publisher of a Roman Catholic periodical , returning half a guinea with my advertisement of Letter the Second , before a word of it had been submitted to judgment , which has since been done;—Nov . 18 , 1814 . "Sir , —As I anticipated , the advertisement of the letters on Freemasonry is not considered unobjectionable in . . . . as it is said , they
call in question a decision of the Holy See . I therefore beg to return , & c . " Yours most truly , . " The above astute assumption I deny .