Now we are told in Holy Writ in reference to this matter. St. Paul, alluding to this secret traditional instruction in the several degrees of Christian learning, says to those advanced to a higher or more perfect degree: "and I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as to babes in Christ. I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able."[88] Even their first lessons in the great mystery were imperfect. Other and further instruction was to complete it. So also St. Peter saith in his general letter, "Wherefore laying aside all malice and all guile and hypocrisies and envies {77} and all evil speakings, as new-born babes, desire the sincere milk of the word that ye may grow thereby."[89] And again, St. Paul saith,[90] "For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe. But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use" (habit, or perfection) "have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil. Therefore leaving the principles" (the word of the beginning of Christ) "of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on to perfection,"[91] &c. We need not here refer to the wonderful spread of Christianity. We learn a plain and simple lesson taught by Jesus, as to the administration of his church. "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles," &c. "Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely have ye received, freely give. Provide neither gold, nor silver, nor brass, in your purses: nor scrip for your journey, neither two coats, neither shoes, nor yet a staff; for the workman is worthy of his meat."[92] When questioned before Pilate, he declared, "My kingdom is not of this world."[93] Whether the successors of the {78} apostles have or not, since that day, established a kingdom of this world, is not for us here to discuss. Whether those that claim such succession obey the precept quoted, or not, we do not interfere with.

To insure unity in the church throughout the world, prudence would suggest that there should be some place, free from the control of worldly politics, whence its teachings should issue, and its counsels be heard. In its infancy the Christian church suffered bitterly from persecution. The faithful everywhere received a crown of martyrdom. When earthly terrors interposed, the blood of the martyrs proved the seed of the church.

It is for us, however, to trace in history the secret teachings of those who have claimed its highest authority in any denomination, and if we do not reach their private counsels, their acts proclaim them.

Has, or not, each Christian church been tempted by worldly power, wealth, and honor, like all other systems of religion?

Have there existed within their jurisdiction, confraternities, with secular power, directly or indirectly under their control, seeking by secret measures to manage the government of the nations of this earth?

That great Creator, whose word is truth which can not change, declared as law to govern all his creatures, "THOU SHALT NOT KILL." What saith history of those who claim to have acted in his name? Why, and in what manner did they act? {79}

The south of France in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries became a scene of blood, the immediate cause of which was the erections of the "tribunals of faith," better known to us as a secret society called "THE INQUISITION." Innocent III., who ascended the papal chair in 1198, conceived the project thereof, to extirpate the rebellious members of the church—the Albigenses—and to extend the papal power at the expense of the bishops: and his successors carried out his plan. This tribunal, "the holy office" or "inquisition" (sanctum officium), was under the immediate direction of the papal chair: it was to seek out heretics and adherents of false doctrines, and to pronounce its dreadful sentence against their fortune, their honor, and their lives, without appeal. The process of this tribunal differed entirely from that of the civil courts. The informer was not only concealed, but rewarded by the inquisition. The accused was obliged to be his own accuser. Suspected persons were secretly seized and thrown into prison. No better instruments could be found for inquisitors than the mendicant orders of monks, particularly the Franciscans and Dominicans, whom the pope employed to destroy the heretics, and inquire into the conduct of bishops. Pope Gregory IX., in 1233, completed the design of his predecessors, and, as they had succeeded in giving these inquisitorial monks, who were wholly dependent on the pope, an unlimited power, and in rendering the interference {80} of the temporal magistrates only nominal, the inquisition was successively introduced into several parts of Italy, and into some provinces of France; its power in the latter country being more limited than in the former. The tribunals of faith were admitted into Spain in the middle of the thirteenth century, but a firm opposition was made to them, particularly in Castile and Leon, and the bishops there maintained their exclusive jurisdiction in spiritual matters. For a time this power waned, when, afterward in the fifteenth century, it assumed an aspect truly alarming. Three religions then prevailed in Spain: Christians, Jews, and Mahommedans. The power of the nobles was a bar, at the same time, to the absolute power of Ferdinand and Isabella. But this engine of religious tyranny accomplished their ends, and became the most powerful instrument of their policy. Owing to the fanatical preaching of Fernando Nunez, who taught the persecution of the Jews to be a good work, popular tumults prevailed, in which this people was plundered, robbed, and murdered. Cardinal Mendoza, at Seville, in 1477, condemned and punished many who persevered in opposition to the doctrines of his faith.

Mendoza recommended the establishment of the inquisition to Ferdinand and Isabella. Dependent entirely upon the court, what better engine could they use to render their power absolute, by confiscation of estates to fill their treasury, and to limit the {81} power of the nobles and superior clergy? In the assembly of the estates, therefore, held at Toledo, 1480, in spite of all opposition, it was determined to establish a tribunal, under the name of the general inquisition (general inquisicion suprema). This was opened in Seville, 1481. Thomas de Torquenada, prior of the Dominican convent at Segovia, father-confessor to Mendoza, had been appointed first grand inquisitor by the king and queen, in 1478. The peaceful teachings of the meek and lowly Jesus do not seem to have had much influence on this political Boanerges. He had two hundred familiars, and a guard of fifty horsemen, but he lived in continual fear of poison. The Dominican monastery at Seville soon became insufficient to contain the numerous prisoners, and the king removed the court to the castle in the suburb of Triana. At the first auto da fe (act of faith), seven apostate Christians were burnt, and the number of penitents was much greater. Spanish writers relate that above seventeen thousand were given up to the inquisition. More than two thousand were condemned to the flames the first year, and great numbers fled to neighboring countries. The then pope, Sixtus IV., opposed the establishment of this court, as being the conversion of an ecclesiastical into a secular tribunal: but he was compelled to submit to circumstances, and actually promulgated a bull subjecting Aragon, Valencia, and Sicily, the hereditary dominions of Ferdinand, to the {82} inquisitor-general of Castile. The introduction of the new tribunal was attended with risings and oppositions in many places, excited by the cruelty of the inquisitors, and encouraged, perhaps, by the jealousy of the bishops. Saragossa and other places refused admission to the inquisitors, many of whom lost their lives; but the people were obliged to yield in the contest; and the kings not only became the absolute judges in matters of faith, but the honor, property, and life of every subject were in their hands. The political importance of this institution may be estimated by the following statement. In every community, the grand inquisitor must fix a period, from thirty to forty days, within which time heretics, and those who have lapsed from the faith, shall deliver themselves up to the inquisition. Penitent heretics and apostates, although pardoned, could hold no public office, nor become lessees, lawyers, physicians, apothecaries, or grocers; nor wear gold, silver, or precious stones; nor ride; nor carry arms; during their whole life, under a penalty of being declared guilty of a relapse into heresy: and they were obliged to give up a part of their property for the support of the war against the Moors. Those who did not surrender themselves within the time fixed were deprived of their property irrevocably. The absent, also, and those who had been long dead, could be condemned, provided there was sufficient evidence against them. The bones of those who were condemned after death were dug up, {83} and the property which they had left escheated to the king.

At first the jurisdiction of the inquisition was not accurately defined; but it was regularly organized by the ordinance of 1484, establishing branches in the different provinces of Spain, under the direction of the inquisitor-general. The inquisitor-general presided, with aid of six or seven counsellers nominated by the king; and his officers were a fiscal (or quasi prosecuting attorney), two secretaries, a receiver, two relators, a secuestrador (or escheator), and officials. In an ordinance of 1732, it was made the duty of all believers, to inform the inquisition, if they knew any one, living or dead, present or absent, who had wandered from the faith, who did observe, or had observed the laws of Moses, or even spoken favorably of them: if they knew any one who followed, or had followed the doctrines of Luther; any one who had concluded an alliance with the devil, either expressly or virtually; any one who possessed any heretical book, or the Koran, or the Bible in the Spanish tongue; or, in fine, if they knew any one who had harbored, received, or favored heretics. If the accused did not appear at the third summons he was excommunicated. From the moment that the prisoner was in the power of the court he was cut off from the world. Then followed tortures, solitary confinement, and death in flames, with every attendant of abject humiliation, while his name, with that {84} of his children and grand-children, was officially declared infamous. Napoleon crushed this monstrous iniquity December 4, 1808. According to the estimate of Llorente, the number of victims of the Spanish inquisition, from 1481 to 1808, amounted to 341,021 persons.

In Portugal the inquisition was established in 1557. Whence they also carried a branch of it to Goa, in the East Indies; in like manner as the Spaniards established one in America.[94]

From the earlier days, however, of the Christian religion we find a select few known as the MYSTICS, steadily pursuing a peaceful course in the investigation of truth. Of them it is said, that they exercised a powerful influence both upon life and literature: and, although the inculcation of meekness and self-humiliation paralyzed active exertion, and a life devoted to emotions and sentiments occasionally produced fanaticism, yet this influence, especially in the middle ages was highly beneficial. John Tauler, of Strasbourg, Henry Suss, of Constance, and Thomas a Kempis, were active mystics, and eminent among their fraternity which was called "the brethren of the common life." Theirs was a religion of feeling, poetry, and imagination, in contrast with philosophical rules and forms of reasoning, as taught by the school-men. They excused their fanaticism, by appealing to the words of St. Paul: {85} "The spirit prays in us by sighs and groans that are unutterable." Now, if the spirit, say they, prays in us, we must resign ourselves to its motions, and be swayed and guided by its impulse, by remaining in mere inaction. Hence, passive contemplation they considered the highest state of perfection. The number of the mystics increased in the fourth century under the influence of the Grecian fanatic, who gave himself out as Dionysius, the Areopagite, a disciple of St. Paul, and probably lived about this period; and by pretending to higher degrees of perfection than other Christians, and practising greater austerities, their cause gained ground, especially in the eastern provinces in the fifth century. A copy of the pretended works of Dionysius, was sent by Balbus to Louis the Meek, in the year 824, which kindled the flame of mysticism in the western provinces, and filled the Latins with the most enthusiastic admiration of this new religion. In the twelfth century these mystics took the lead in their method of expounding Scripture; and by searching for mysteries and hidden meanings in the plainest expressions, forced the word of God into a conformity with their visionary doctrines, their enthusiastic feelings, and the system of discipline which they had drawn from the excursion of their irregular fancies. In the thirteenth century they were the most formidable antagonists of the schoolmen, and toward the close of the fourteenth many of them resided and propagated their tenets in {86} almost every part of Europe. In the fifteenth century they had many persons of distinguished merit in their number; and in the sixteenth, previously to the Reformation, it is said that the only true sparks of real piety were to be found among them.[95]

Let us, then, examine the rise of confraternities attached to, and of, the Christian church, yet not necessarily more than its other laity entitled to authority which they afterward usurped.

Monachism took its rise in the East, where a solitary and contemplative life, devoted to the consideration of divine subjects, had always been considered more meritorious than active exertion. This calling was gradually adopted by so many, that at the end of the third century, the Egyptian Antonius, who had cast away his vast possessions, and chosen the desert for his residence, collected together the hitherto dispersed anchorites (monachi) into fenced places (monasteria, caenobia, claustra, cloisters), that they might live together in fellowship; and his disciple, Pachomius, soon gave the brotherhood a rule. Monachism soon extended to the west. In the sixth century, Benedict, of Nursia, established the first monastery on Mount Casius, in Lower Italy, and became, by this means, the founder of the widely-spread order of Benedictines, which rapidly extended itself among all nations, and built many convents. These monasteries, erected, for the most part, in {87} beautiful and remote situations, and the inhabitants of which were obliged to take the three vows of chastity (celibacy), personal poverty, and obedience, proved in those days of lawlessness and barbarism, a blessing to mankind. They converted heaths and forests into flourishing farms. They afforded a place of refuge (asylum) to the persecuted and oppressed. They ennobled the rude minds of men by the preaching of the Gospel. They planted the seeds of morality and civilization in the bosoms of the young by their schools for education. And they preserved the remains of ancient literature and philosophy from utter destruction. Many of the Benedictine monasteries were the nurseries of education, the arts, and the sciences, as St. Gallen, Fulda, Reichenau, and Corvey (in Westphalia), and many others. When the Benedictine order became relaxed, the monastery in Clugny, in Burgundy, separated itself from them in the tenth century, and introduced a more rigid discipline. In the twelfth century the monks of Clugny numbered upward of two thousand cloisters. But this order, also, soon proved insufficient to satisfy the strong demands of the middle age, against the allurements of sin, and the seductions of the flesh; so that, at the end of the eleventh century, the Cistercians, and, a few decades later, the Premonstrants sprang up: the former in Burgundy (Citeaux), the latter in a woody country near Laon (Premontre). The order of Carthusians, founded about the year {88} 1084, which commenced with a cloister of anchorites (Carthusia, Chartreuse) in a rugged valley near Grenoble, was the most austere in its practice. A life of solitude and silence in a cell, a spare and meagre diet, a penitential garment of hair, flagellations, and the rigid practices of devotional exercises, were duties imposed upon every member of this fraternity.

They deserve, at our hands, the full benefit of an honest and severe Christian effort to find out and nurture truth; so long as government and political power did not control them. History next tells us of the so-called "MENDICANT ORDERS." They originated in the thirteenth century, and this establishment was productive of remarkable results. Francis of Assisi (A.D. 1226), the son of a rich merchant, renounced all his possessions, clothed himself in rags, and wandered through the world, begging, and preaching repentance. His fiery zeal procured him disciples, who, like himself, renounced their worldly possessions, fasted, prayed, tore their backs with scourges, and supplied their slender wants from voluntary alms and donations. The order of Franciscans then spread rapidly through all countries. About the same time arose the order of Dominicans, or preaching monks, founded by an illustrious and learned Spaniard, Dominicus. Their chief objects were the maintenance of the predominant faith in its considered purity, and the extinction of heretical opinions. In {89} carrying these out, they became endowed with the greatest worldly and temporal privileges, received the powerful patronage of the pope, gradually obtained the chairs in the universities, and took the lead in the murder of their fellow creatures through the inquisition. What a temptation to brawling mendicants, too lazy to earn a living, authorized to beg, and the supple tools of political leaders; and all this by a mysterious society, under the guise and pretence of the Christian religion! Laic tools for such clerical workmen!

While, from the mystics of that date, valuable works have been preserved, what has been left us from these mendicant orders? Anything save the cry of blood from the earth? Aught else than servile obedience in accomplishing the mandates of those in power?

In the eleventh century, the crusades had given rise to a singular class of men, half-military, half-monk. They had their secret means of recognition, a peculiar garb, and a professed object. Religion was the motive cause, while science and philosophy seem to have been secondary with them. They were knights, of three orders, viz.: the Knights of St. John, or Hospitallers; the Templars; and the Teutonic Knights. The Knights of St. John are known equally by the name of the Knights of Malta, because, in 1530, Charles V. granted them the islands of Malta, Gozzo, and Comino, on condition of perpetual war {90} against the infidels and pirates, and the restoration of these islands to Naples, if the order should succeed in recovering Rhodes. The chief of this order had immense possessions in most parts of Europe. Their chief was called Grand Master of the Holy Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem, and Guardian of the Army of Jesus Christ. He was chosen by vote, and lived at La Villette in Malta. Foreign powers addressed him as Altezza eminentissima. His income equalled a million of guilders annually. This order still exists. Originally the affairs of the order were exercised by "THE CHAPTER," which consisted of eight balliages (ballivi conventuali), of the different languages of which the knights of the order consisted, that is, Provence, Auvergne, France, Italy, Aragon, Germany, Castile, and England. The lands of these ballivi conventuali of languages were divided into three classes, priories, balliages, and commanderies. Of the priories the German had the preference, and was called the Grand Priory.

This confraternity were free-masons. And their organization was framed accordingly. Such was their kindness and benevolence to a wandering and unprotected pilgrim, that when afterward accosted on his journey with the customary inquiry, "Whence came you?" one and multitudes would answer, "From a lodge of the Holy St. John of Jerusalem," having experienced their hospitality and kindness in their pilgrimage. Their duty was to nurse, accommodate, {91} and protect pilgrims to the Holy Land: and everywhere on their travels, in whatever country, these lodges (or hutten) were found for their comfort.

In the beginning of the twelfth century a secret order was formed, "for the defence of the Holy Sepulchre, and the protection of Christian Pilgrims." They were first called "The poor of the Holy City," and afterward assumed the appellation of "Templars," because their house was near the Temple. The order was founded by Baldwin II., then king of Jerusalem, with the concurrence of the pope.

Many of the noblest knights connected themselves therewith, and they became known, then, as the KNIGHTS TEMPLARS.

But the order degenerated, became faithless to their vows, and used the wealth and power they had attained in such manner as to occasion their public condemnation.

In the beginning of the fourteenth century a sect of soi-disant philosophers appeared, known as the ROSICRUCIANS. They bound themselves together by a solemn secret, which they all swore inviolably to preserve; and obliged themselves, at their admission into the order, to a strict observance of certain established rules. They pretended chiefly to devote themselves to medicine, but above all that, to be masters of important secrets, and among others, that of the philosopher's stone; all which they affirmed to have received by tradition from the ancient Egyptians, {92} Chaldeans, the Magi, and the Gymnosophists. By their pretences that they could restore youth, they received the name of Immortelles. Their pretension to all knowledge, acquired for them the title of Illuminati. For years they were lost sight of. Consequently, when in later years they once more appeared under their original organization, they have been recognised as "The invisible brothers." Their name is not, as generally supposed, derived from rosa and crux: but it is from ros (dew), the then supposed solvent of gold, and crux (the cross). To see, perhaps, a badge of this order, mark the arms of Luther! a cross placed upon a rose. True, a mistake as to the definition, yet does it not indicate the reason of its use politically and otherwise?

Passing by, then, the middle ages, we commence a new era with the rise and progress of a religious secret order, without a parallel in the history of the world; one which has risen in influence and power far above all the other orders of the church, prohibiting its members to accept office in the church, yet which, in the art of ruling, has excelled the governments of the world hitherto, no less than any of its ecclesiastical rivals of any age or country.

The Society of Jesus—known as THE JESUITS—early raised itself to a degree of historical importance unparalleled in its kind. This order was founded (1539) by Ignatius Loyola, who called it the Society of Jesus, in consequence of a vision, and bound the {93} members, in addition to the usual vows of poverty, chastity, and implicit obedience to their superiors, to a fourth, viz: to go, unhesitatingly, and without recompense, whithersoever they should be sent, as missionaries for the conversion of infidels and heretics, or for the service of the church in any other way, and to devote all their powers and means to the accomplishment of the work. The intention of Ignatius Loyola was originally directed rather to mystic and ascetic contemplations; but the order, from the nature of its fourth vow, soon took a shape adapted to the wants of the church.

The origin of this society seems to have been a vision to the over-wrought mind of Loyola: may we call it a temporary inflammation of the brain? He was a Spaniard of very warm imagination, and a man of great sensibility. He declared he saw Mary, the mother of Jesus, in a vision: that she gave him the power of chastity: that Jesus and Satan appeared to him in the form of military officers enlisting men for service; whereupon he followed Christ. The society designated their object by Loyola's motto—Omnia ad majorem Dei gloriam. The intimate union of this society has been insured by severe trials, constant inspection, and unconditional obedience. Thoroughly organized by past experience, it now quietly pursues a policy deep, powerful, and difficult to be met on account of its mysticism. After Loyola's death the society was farther developed by Lainez, {94} and after him, by Aquaviva, men of deep knowledge of mankind, and steadfast purpose, who became the real authors of the present society. The seat of the society was, in so far, in Rome, as the general of the order resided there, with the committee of the society, and the monitor, who, totally independent of him, controlled the general as if he were his conscience. The order was divided into provinces, each of which was superintended by a provincial. Under the care of these officers were the professed-houses, with each a praepositus at its head, and the colleges, with each a rector. In the latter there were also novices. The mutual dependence of all parts of the system resemble the structure of a well-built fabric. The relations of subordination are so well ordered that the society is simplex duntaxat unum, without interrupting the free will of the individual, as is said, who only had to obey in permitted things.

The popes Paul III. and Julius III., seeing what a support they would have in the Jesuits against what is usually called "the Reformation," which was rapidly gaining ground, granted to them privileges such as no body of men, in church, or state, had ever before obtained. They were permitted not only to enjoy all the rights of the mendicant and secular orders, and to be exempt from all episcopal and civil jurisdiction and taxes, so that they acknowledged no authority but that of the pope and the superiors of their order, and were permitted to exercise every {95} priestly function, parochial rights notwithstanding, among all classes of men, even during an interdict; but, also (what is not even permitted to archbishops unconditionally), they could absolve from all sins and ecclesiastical penalties, change the objects of the vows of the laity, acquire churches and estates without further papal sanction, erect houses for the order, and might, according to circumstances, dispense themselves from the canonical observance of hours of fasts and prohibition of meats, and even from the use of the breviary. Besides this, their general was invested with unlimited power over the members; could send them on missions of every kind, even among excommunicated heretics; could appoint them professors of theology at his discretion, wherever he chose, and confer academical dignities, which were to be reckoned equal to those given by universities. These privileges, which secured to the Jesuits a spiritual power almost equal to that of the pope himself, together with a greater impunity, in point of religious observance, than the laity possessed, were granted them to aid their missionary labors, so that they might accommodate themselves to any profession or mode of life, among heretics, and infidels, and be able, wherever they found admission, to organize Catholic churches without a further authority. A general dispersion, then, of the members throughout society with the most entire union and subordination, formed the basis of their constitution. {96}

In the education of youth, there has been a very unjust charge against them, that is, that they mutilated the classics. Would to God that every pure Christian would follow such an example; and that we might thereby present such an expurgated edition, as would create all the good they may contain, devoid of evil. Any who have read Virgil, Ovid, Terence, or other classic works, must acknowledge this necessity. Even Shakespeare's plays can not be read, as printed, in a modest company. There is not, either, any prudery in this. And, accordingly, a family expurgated edition has been published by Dr. Bowdler, demanding a far greater circulation than it may have as yet received. Praise, then, be awarded to all instructors of youth who will promote such expurgation from the classics as will blot out their immorality!

The latitude in which this society has understood its rights and immunities has given occasion to fear an unlimited extension and exercise of them, dangerous to all existing authority, civil and ecclesiastical, as the constitution of the order, and its erection into an independent monarchy in the bosom of other governments, have assumed a more fixed character.

This society seems to have been divided into different ranks or classes. The novices, chosen from the most talented and well-educated youths, and men without regard to birth or external circumstances; and who were tried for two years, in separate {97} novitiate houses, in all imaginable exercises of self-denial and obedience, to determine whether they would be useful to the purposes of the order, were not ranked among the actual members, the lowest of whom are the secular coadjutors, who take no monastic vows, and may, therefore, be dismissed. They serve the order partly as subalterns, partly as confederates, and may be regarded as the people of the Jesuit state. Distinguished laymen, public officers, and other influential personages (e.g., Louis XIV., in his old age), were honored with admission into this class, to promote the interests of the order. Higher in rank, stand the scholars and spiritual coadjutors, who are instructed in the higher branches of learning, take upon themselves solemn monastic vows, and are bound to devote themselves particularly to the education of youth. These, as it were, the artists of the Jesuit community, are employed as professors in academies, as preachers in cities, and at courts; as rectors, and professors in colleges, as tutors and spiritual guides in families which they wish to gain or to watch, and as assistants in the missions. Finally, the nobility, or highest class, is made up of the professed, among whom are admitted only the most-experienced members, whose address, energy, and fidelity to the order, have been eminently tried and proved. According to one statement, they make profession, that is, take the vows of their order, by binding themselves in addition to the common {98} monastic vows by the fourth vow, to the undertaking of missions, among whom they consider heathen and heretics, as governors in colonies in remote parts of the world, as father-confessors of princes, and as residents of the order in places where it has no college. They are entirely exempt, on the other hand, from the care of the education of youth. None but the professed have a voice in the election of a general, who must himself be of their number, and who has the right of choosing from them the assistants, provincials, superiors, and rectors. The general holds his office for life, and has his residence in Rome, where he is attended by a monitor, and five assistants or counsellors, who also represent the five chief nations: the Italians, Germans, French, Spanish, and Portuguese. He is the centre of the government of the whole order, and receives monthly reports from the provincials, and one every quarter from the superiors of the professed-houses, from the rectors of the colleges, and from the masters of the novices. These reports detail all remarkable occurrences, political events, and the characters, capacities, and services of individual members, and thereupon the general directs what is to be done, and how to make use of tried and approved members. All are bound to obey him implicitly, and even contrary to their own convictions. There is no appeal from his orders.

Loyola died July 31, 1556, leaving to the order a sketch of this constitution, and a mystical treatise {99} called "Exercitia Spiritualia," which work occupies the first four weeks of every novice. The rapid increase of the order, and the previous purity of Loyola's life, obtained canonization for him in 1662. Their first great missionary was St. Francis Xavier, whose labors (1541) in the Portuguese East Indies, where he died ten years afterward, have obtained for him the name of "the apostle of India", and the honor of canonization. We are told that, at Goa, Travancore, Cochin, Malacca, Ceylon, and Japan, some hundred thousand were by him converted to the Christian religion. If so, at present the light of it has become very dim. Stat nominis umbra. The inquisition at Goa, perhaps, may have shown the people the difference between theory and practice. Claudius Aquaviva, of the family of the dukes of Atri, general of the Jesuits from 1581 to 1615, is the author of their system of education. The want of deep, critical learning, with the mutilation of the classics (for which last they deserve praise, not blame), exposed their teachers, for a time, to the censure of philologists. Viewed with suspicion by the French, they only were admitted into that nation in 1562, under the name of "the Fathers of the College of Clermont," with a humiliating renunciation of their most important privileges, but they soon united in the factions of that country, and, notwithstanding a strong suspicion of their having had a share in the murder of Henry III., under the {100} protection of the Guises, they contrived to establish themselves, regain their privileges, and deprive the French Protestants of their rights. One of their pupils, John Chatel, attempted Henry's life (1594), and this caused their banishment until 1603, when, at the intercession of the pope, they were again restored by Henry IV. That they participated in the crime of Ravaillac could never be proved. They became the confidential advisers in Germany, of Ferdinand II. and III. They discovered remarkable political talent in the thirty years' war; the league of the Catholics could do nothing without them. Father Lamormain, a Jesuit, and confessor to the emperor, effected the downfall of Wallenstein, and by means of his agents, kept the jealous Bavarians in their alliance with Austria. Then burst upon them in France and the Netherlands, the hurricane of the Jansenist controversy, when Pascal's Provincial Letters scathed them, and his sentiments were even quoted (1679) by Innocent IX., against sixty-five of their offensive propositions. Complaints were made against some of them by the Iroquois, who had been converted by them, as would appear by the treaty of peace (1682). In 1759, by an edict, they were declared guilty of high-treason, and expelled from Portugal. Owing to difficulties at Martinique under their deputy, Father La Vallette, and the declaration of their general, Lorenzo Ricci, refusing to make any change in their constitution (sint aut non sint), "let them be as they {101} are, or not be," the king of France (1764) issued a decree for abolishing the order in all the French states, as being a mere political society, dangerous to religion, whose object was self-aggrandizement. In 1767 they were driven out of Spain, and soon after from Naples, Parma, and Malta. And the voice of public opinion at length compelled Pope Clement XIV. to publish his famous bull, Dominus ac Redemptor noster, of July 21, 1773, by which the society of Jesus was totally abolished in all the states of Christendom. The society, however, did not become extinct. In 1780 they were thought to have possessed themselves of the secrets of the Rosicrucians, and to have taken a part in the schemes of the Illuminati. In 1787, an unsuccessful attempt was made to revive the order under the name of the Vicentines. Pius VII. restored the order, in 1814, upon the issuance of the bull, August 7, Solicitudo omnium. In 1815 they were restored in Spain. Russia, by an imperial ukase, March 25, 1820, banished them thence. Since then they have been driven from Mexico, again restored by Santa Anna, and now, though resident, they are politically powerless under the administration of President Comonfort. They now seem to rely on the United States of America as their chief asylum, and upon the valley of the Mississippi river and its tributaries, as their basis of operations. Full and perfect freedom of thought and speech, of religious toleration, and of mode of life, monastic or {102} otherwise, insures to them a safe home in this country. They possess a flourishing college at Georgetown, which may almost be considered as part of the city of Washington, the capital of the United States. Also one at Cincinnati, and one at St. Louis, well endowed, and possessed of great wealth. They exercise a powerful yet unseen influence over the minds of the members of the Catholic faith where they reside, each naturalized citizen of which has an equal voice in selecting all officers of state and general government. An eminent writer has remarked, that everything in history has its time, and the order of Jesuits can never rise to any great eminence in an age in which knowledge is so rapidly spreading. We think differently. A society so capable of adaptation to any circumstances, whether political, religious, or social, plastic in nature to meet every desired impression, talented, highly learned, wealthy, and among others, embracing in its order some men of such pure and admirable life as to be cited as examples of virtue and Christian character, with the protection the American flag throws around all under its folds, is to be carefully observed. Human nature is always the same. The past history, then, of this society merits the study of every philanthropist and patriot. Once, in Paraguay, it became a blessing to mankind. Within due limits, it may be so anywhere. But its interference in any political affairs, under pretence of serving him, whose "kingdom is not of this {103} world," is not to be tolerated, as it may prove a most dangerous engine in the struggle of the cause of popular self-government. An unconditional surrender of one's own convictions to the will of another man is at variance with every principle of republicanism.

* * * * *

{104}

CHAPTER V.

The Struggle between an alleged Jus Divinum Regum, and Popular Sovereignty.—And the Efforts now attempted to destroy our Grand Experiment of Self-Government.—Practical Results.

With the differences of religious bodies as to dogmas of faith, this essay has nothing to do; but so far as churches connected with any religion, interfere with temporal governments, by mystic confraternities, that is a topic directly within our scope. Any union of church and state must, from these authorities, appear in opposition to the unprejudiced action of the citizen in the government of his country.

The great struggle for political power, the contest as to the source thereof—whether a fancied divine right (jus divinum) in any family, or in an individual by anointment of a priest; or the free voice of a free people governing themselves by framing a constitution, limiting power in the hands of rulers, who are only their agents—is now undergoing a severe test. Of this, however, more hereafter.

The history of England, from the days of James II.—yes, even from Henry VIII., whose crimes form a strange contrast to his assumption of a title to being {105} head of a church—presents a singular contest for political power, by means of religious domination.

From the days of William of Orange, the parties in Ireland (which seems to have formed the battleground of these contestants) have been not only well-defined, but they have been organized in the most perfect mysticism, into Orange men and Ribbon men. Let the days of Curran, Grattan, and of the persecuting government tell that story. The blood of an Emmett has crowned a noble effort with martyrdom. His last speech will be read as long as school-books can perpetuate one of the finest efforts of oratory.

Meantime, a secret society still existed which softened down asperity, and extended the blessings of fraternity even among those arrayed against each other—not only there, but over the world. By its teachings and its obligations, universal charity was inculcated. Is there an intelligent FREE-MASON who has perused our previous pages, but what has recognised the history of his own society from the origin of the Kabbalistae? Spread everywhere, under whatever name, emanating from a common origin, recognised by common principles and instruction, enforcing the study of the liberal arts and sciences, teaching philosophy throughout the world, and the hope of a future immortality, it has, as a mystic order, taken deep root in every nation, but more so in republics, not having fear of an interdict, or other religious {106} fulmination. It has not and does not interfere in politics, nor seek political power in any shape. Like its brothers of old under Pythagoras in Magna Graecia, it teaches philosophy, and is well calculated to promote such education as must form true statesmen. So catholic is its every teaching, and such are its fraternal tendencies, that one church has placed it under ban. Throughout the world, whether among the descendants of the ancient Magi, the Hebrew Cabbalist, the Rosicrucian, or Templar, in the deserts of Africa, the forests of America, or on the wide-spread ocean, the symbols of recognition are known and received. Such have been its tendencies that spurious imitations for mere political purposes have been frequent. The Illuminati, the Carbonari, and other secret political societies have been supposed to be Masonic lodges. But it is a great mistake. The Kabbalists never interfered with, or acted in opposition to the Hebrew Theocracy. Their brothers of a later date have never interfered with politics, even to the present day; nor have they, in any wise, inculcated a single maxim at variance with their duty to God, their neighbor, or themselves. They have simply preserved and obeyed the original traditional instruction handed down to them.

Another benevolent secret society has sprung up, chiefly in the United States, calling themselves the Independent Order of Odd Fellows. This is a charitable confraternity, intended, mainly, to promote {107} benevolence, aid the sick and distressed, and cultivate the warmer sympathies of our nature. It is of modern origin, and in most things seems to be an imitation of Free-Masonry. It has been productive of great good in the accomplishment of its benevolent purposes. Having no leaning whatever toward politics, it quietly pursues its mission of love.

Thus, then, we have arrived at a point where we must pause.

The summary of the past seems to be as follows:—

I. From the earliest history of the world there seems to have been an effort on the part of those who pretended to control the consciences and religious views of others to preserve in their own hands, the predominant political power.

1. The first government recorded is that of Nimrod. He discarded patriarchal instruction; united tribes in cities; and formed their combination into an empire. The Magi controlled him, and, at his death, under the pretence of his deification, preserved his power in the priesthood.

2. In the extension of the Magi, every great leader, or king, was one of them; and obedient to the rules and instructions of their general, the Hierophant.

3. When, in the assertion of popular right, Pythagoras was driven away by Cylon, the then imperfect effort of self-government fell through. But little understood, its then dim light faded.

4. The society of the Kabbalistae, part of whom {108} were afterward known as the Pythagorean league, as the Collegio fabrorum of Numa Pompilius, as the Liberi Architectonici of the middle ages, and as the Free-Masons of the present day; this society, I repeat, never interfered in politics.

5. The Christian church was tempted to forget, that Christ's kingdom was not of this world. And its two great branches, that of Rome and England, were seduced into the error of seeking to obtain power through public policy.

Rome exerted her influences through her praetorian cohorts, the confraternities of mendicants and of Jesus—the Jesuits. Unknown, and in silence, they were domiciliated in courts and in families, throughout all nations; and some roamed as itinerants. The will of their general, on their unconditional subserviency to his behest, seemed to create an almost omnipresent power to be controlled by Rome alone. Has not the exercise of it been exemplified in the inquisition? Was it not felt in the massacre of St. Bartholomew? I will not stop to ask the power and control of a Madame Maintenon, or Du Barry: nor whose influences controlled them. Does not all history portray their one effort?

But has not the Church of England endeavored to obtain temporal power, also, by interference in the affairs of this world, politically?

Shame! shame!! If the priesthood are honest in giving an undivided allegiance to HIM, whom they {109} have taken an oath only to serve; and yet, whose "kingdom is not of this world;" how dare they violate that obligation? "Ne sutor ultra crepidam," &c.

But we in the United States are not better than our neighbors. Man is the same everywhere, but for education.

And this brings us to the great, practical lesson, to which end all that has thus far been detailed has been directed.

Americans! no matter of what nation you came, consider this lesson.

We have ignored and thrown aside the priestly fable of an anointment by a man conferring an hereditary right to rule his brother man, by any family. This jus divinum regum is an absurdity, practically discarded by those who assert it. What divine right has been granted either to Napoleon the Great, or to Napoleon the little? Whence came it? By whose hands? How is it preserved? Is not the same religious power ready to crown a Bourbon one day, and, in spite of the hereditary jus divinum already granted, crown a Corsican (who has waded through blood to his throne) the next day; over the very rights of the Bourbon, who relies on that jus divinum as his title?

A divine right (if any) is here granted to both—to the Bourbon, and to the Corsican. Can truth contradict itself? If there be a contradiction must there not be error somewhere? {110}

This jus divinum that began with the deification of Nimrod, is still perpetuated though in other hands.

But we must look into this a little further.

II. Although the Theocracy in the days of Moses was of temporary duration, and human power afterward asserted a kingly right, was that divine right ever preserved? If divine, it is immutable. Does history show this? When Titus conquered Jerusalem, does not Jewish history tell us the voice was heard saying, "LET US GO HENCE?"

III. History shows, among men, two classes who have governed others:—

1. Kings, emperors, and rulers.

2. Priests and clergy, controlling the superstitious feelings of mankind; yes, even these kings, emperors, and rulers, by mysticism.

IV. There have been throughout history two classes of secret societies.

One always endeavoring to govern and control the masses politically, by religious mysteries, &c. The other endeavoring to persuade to the study of science and philosophy, and trying to wean men from the mere struggle of this world's power, to a preparation for another world, into which we must be born spiritually, by human death, and as to which this earth is only the school-house. And this class has not interfered in any manner with politics in any country. {111}

This bring us to the present condition of our own beloved country at this time.

A secret society, also political, was formed here, known as THE KNOW-NOTHINGS. And its secrecy was about to destroy it, when that secrecy, under the power of the press, vanished into mist.

But what was the origin thereof? And when, after gentlemen and statesmen controlled it, and expelled its rubbish, it assumed a powerful influence, and a new form, as an "American Party," what were the deep moving causes which led to its prominent position?

From the days of Nimrod to the present day, all history shows an effort on the part of a few to control temporal power, at the expense of the many. They have always acted on the superstitions of man to accomplish this end.

But the American theory (esto perpetua) is, that all men are free and equal in their political rights, when their intellect is that of control, not of servitude; and that the people are the source and fountain of political power. It cometh not from a priest. It is the voice of freemen speaking and acting through their agents, whom they select.

This antagonism is now to be severely tested in coming history.

What is the source of temporal power?

Rome, England, France, and other countries, say it is from "the church," meaning their own particular {112} designation of a religion. That it is a divine right communicated by priestly anointment, attended by public ceremonies, imposing in appearance, and "ad captandum," for the public eye.

The American theory, going far beyond the bare and imperfect teaching of Pythagoras, boldly asserts what is believed to be the true and only origin of temporal power, the free will of a people exercised through agents of its own selection.

For about eighty years past this first great experiment has been successful. But that success has induced the most insidious attacks of those who advocate the opposite policy. We must be watchful, or our liberties will be gone. The game they now play is new in history; but, it is one easily comprehended. It has been well said that the price of liberty is eternal vigilance.

But two centuries since this land was the home of the savage. The Caucasian intellect, however, has assumed its supremacy here; and the Indian, incapable of mental culture, is gradually, but surely passing, like other forms of animal existence, from the world.

One of the highest efforts of the human mind, is the Constitution of the United States of America. The great principles of freemen governing themselves, as there enunciated, must and will necessarily be attacked by the asserters of divine right in temporal government. If our experiment succeeds the powers of Europe must fall, or undergo an entire change. {113} England's nobility must acknowledge, sooner or later, the equality of the commonalty and gentry with themselves. Distinctions in France have already gone, except as to the assertion of the power of an emperor by virtue of a priestly coronation.

The popular masses of Europe have only displayed their first, but, as yet, imperfect efforts to assert their political rights. It is the reflex action of the great principle we have successfully, thus far, practised. And will not the powers who have conquered the masses then thus far, use every effort to destroy this experiment of ours and perpetuate thereby their own existence? If we continue to succeed, our lesson to the world is the death-knell of monarchy and imperial power. Foreign powers and priestly powers are making this effort. And if we are doomed to fail, it will be by the DISUNION their emissaries here endeavor to produce. With us, again, is religious influence exerted. Servitude is recognised and practised in the south. But the clergy of the north have commenced a fanatical crusade against it. We should guard well against these influences, foreign and domestic, now operating against us.

As a part of the history of the times, it may be proper to give the rise and progress of the so-called order of "Know-Nothings." The plan of the organization was conceived by a gentleman of the city of New York, who, in 1849, prepared and embodied into a system, a plan for uniting the American {114} sentiment of the American people throughout the United States. It was meant as a combined resistance, on the part of the native American population, to foreign and papal influence in this country. The progress of the plan was so slow in its development, that at the end of two years, the number of members uniting in the organization did not exceed thirty. In 1852 the plan was examined by a few gentlemen connected with the Order of United Americans, another secret and American organization, but not directly political or partisan in its aims and objects. A society was formed, and forty-three members signed their names to it, and from that small beginning was formed a body of native Americans which, in a year or two after, exceeded, in the state of New York alone, two hundred thousand members. This state organization soon extended its ramifications all over the country, and is now known as the American party. It has held three national conventions, one in Philadelphia, one at New York, and one in Louisville, and is now no more of a secret party than either of the two great parties opposed to it: the national conventions having abolished all secret meetings, and the state conventions or councils having generally concurred in this abolition of all oaths and all forms of obligation but those of personal honor and mutual good faith.

The ban of secrecy had made it, doubtless, an object of suspicion. Its adversaries hurl at it these {115} unfortunate antecedents. But now all secrecy has been abolished, and the party claims to assert only, the great principle of an INTELLIGENT SELF-GOVERNMENT. They recognise the secret and insidious influences of the Jesuit, and deprecate it. They call attention to it, and to its increasing importance in this valley; but still, in the spirit of liberty, leave the Jesuit free to act as he pleases. They perceive that it is irreconcilable with freedom of thought and conscience to surrender, unconditionally, one's own views and thoughts to the will of any one man, whether he be at Rome or elsewhere. Still he is not interfered with. Let him act with all freedom. You can vote for him for office or not, as you please; and, here, we have reason to fear the secret influence controlled alone at Rome. But, with all this freedom, it is called "persecution" to say "I will not vote for such a man."

Let Europe send over all her emissaries, and our country tells them you shall have the protection of our flag. You shall think, and speak what you will, if it be not to the injury of your neighbor. But is there not a spirit of self-preservation which demands that eternal vigilance which is the price of freedom? Is it "proscription" in saying to another man, "I will not vote for you?" If you can not exercise your own will, where is your freedom? If a whig refuses to vote for a democrat is that "proscription?"

Then, if I believe another man has surrendered his {116} own will to the unconditional control of another, in a foreign country, can I trust him—regarding the antecedents hereinbefore referred to?

It has been said, perhaps unjustly (at least I hope so), that the teaching of this important society, the Jesuit, so deeply-rooted here, is, that "the end justifies the means." If this be so, and if they can exercise over the immigrant population from Europe the power imputed to them—all this also controlled at Rome by the general of the order and his monitor—where can freedom be preserved to us, if they can control a majority of votes here? In such case our liberties are gone. In such case, they have simply adopted and ingeniously carried out the ancient powers of the priestly Magi.

Has not an Englishman, a member of parliament, come to this country, and lectured in New England on the abolition of slavery, expressly to aid in creating disunion of our states?

Has not the leaven of Puritanism been excited to new action to accomplish the same result?

Have not three thousand clergymen been induced to interfere in our temporal and political affairs; just as in past history we find the Magi and the priests did?

Has not the word of God been set at naught? Where the command is, "Thou shalt not kill," are not Sharpe's rifles purchased by their command?

A clever book of fiction, written by a fanatical old {117} woman, although untrue even as a picture of southern society, has obtained for her the cordial entree of British aristocracy.

Then, again, regard the immense immigration from Europe. No sooner is it possible, but we find politicians busy to influence them, and obtain their votes. And they chiefly are opposed to slavery.

As patriots, Americans should say, you may vote. We throw around you no restraint. Your home is our home. You are in every sense a brother, and you shall be deprived of no privilege. But while in no manner the privileges of a freeman should be denied to any, we must not shut our eyes to the influences that surround us.

The Magi controlled the then known world.

The Roman church has done the same. In England a church has assumed secular power.

In each instance it was the fabulous jus divinum by which it was accomplished.

Shall they be allowed by such influences to control and so break down our great experiment of self-government?

Rather let those peaceful and benevolent influences prevail, which were inculcated by societies who taught equality of rights, and peace and charity among men.

This bring us then to the great motive power which alone can save our country.

It is the education of the people, and the freedom of the press, directed through a unity of language. {118} Through these, if properly conducted, unless they be controlled by the hostile influences hereinbefore spoken of, we shall be a happy and united nation.

There is no need, hereafter, of any secret teaching. Secret societies may promote social good, but they are no longer necessary to teach either traditional philosophy, or promote public welfare, except by benevolence.

Our duty is to encourage thought, foster public schools, create a unity of feeling and ideas, by means of a unity of language, and a freedom of the press.

But, in doing so, from the history of the past, can we be too careful in guarding against the insidious influences of societies, whose antecedents in history have proved so dangerous?

Societies having for their object a religious influence, and, thereby intending to control political power, are dangerous. The past has shown it.

Societies of benevolence, like the Free-Masons and Odd-Fellows, have done much good; but each member therein votes, in political matters, as he pleases, and without control. These societies do good to all, without view to any particular faith.

Each person that binds himself, by an obligation, to serve only HIM, whose "kingdom is not of this world," should be debarred thereby from interfering in the politics of this world, which he has thus forsworn.

But what are the facts? Do not even the clergy {119} of New England try to control our government? Are they not even endeavoring to create DISUNION? Is this not with the desire and empressement of foreign power?

How far may not the praetorian bands of Rome aid therein to carry out the result?

Can we be too guarded as to our great experiment?

The first practical result, then, indicated by past history, is, that political power, in monarchies, empires, &c., has been under the control of mere priestly mysteries.

The next is, that human nature is always the same, and will endeavor to accomplish the same result.

Take the history of the past, what are we to anticipate for the future? Can we judge but from the past? Have they not endeavored to govern Europe?

We can only allow the will of freemen to govern us. The will that has, on oath, submitted itself to the control of a foreign power, is not that of a free man, and our duty is to watch it.

Let, then, every secret become a mystery; or, a revealed secret. If it be good to one, let it be good to all. Secure equality of rights. Collision of mind strikes out the sparks of truth. Secure universal education by free schools, ensuring unity of language, but leaving thought free; and the result will be, that secrecy will have become a mystery, or revealed knowledge to all.

Education, and the freedom of the press, are the {120} true safeguards of a republic. Interfere with the exercise of no religion; but let no one system of faith control your government. Frown down every effort of priests or clergy to meddle with politics. Then shall we avoid the errors of the past, preserve our present union, and hope for the spread of the true principles of liberty. With education will be united true piety, each assisting the other, no matter what the peculiar system of faith. Do away with secrecy altogether, and let every blessing that knowledge can confer, be devoted to public information, and the good of all. So, shall the abuses of secrecy be done away with for ever—and it shine forth only in the holy sphere to which it should be confined, to modesty and domestic virtue, religious meditation and prayer, and prudence in the transactions of life.

THE END.

* * * * *

Notes

[1] St. Matt. xi. 28.

[2] Montgomery. Hymn 134. Book of Common Prayer.

[3] St. John, Gospel, iv. 44.

[4] Mal. i. 2.

[5] 1 Corinthians ii. 7-10, 12, 13, 16. Ibid. iv. 1, 5.

[6] 2 Corinthians iv. 7.

[7] 1 Corinthians xv. 22.

[8] St. Matthew xxv. 14 to 29, inclusive.

[9] St. Paul (Rom. xvi. 25, 26) defines "mystery" as above given: "Now to him that is of power to establish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, but now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets," &c.

[10] Exodus vi. 2, 3. "And God spake unto Moses, and said unto him, I am the Lord [or JEHOVAH], and I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty; but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them."

[11] Genesis vii. 2, 3.

[12] Ibid vii. 9.

[13] Ibid xii.

[14] Ibid xx.

[15] Ibid xxvi.

[16] Exodus iv. 27, 28. "And the Lord said unto Aaron, Go into the wilderness to meet Moses. And he went, and met him in the mount of God, and kissed him."

[17] Weber. Outlines of Universal History. Am. Ed., p. 4.

[18] Exodus vii. 11. "Then Pharaoh also called the wise men, and the sorcerers: now the magicians of Egypt, they also did in like manner with their enchantments."

[19] Weber. Outlines Univ. Hist. Sec. 12, p. 12.

[20] Christ. Breithaupt. Prof. &c. De arte decifratoria. Helmstadtii, apud Ch. Fried. Weygand. MDccxxxvii. p. 13. "Apud veteres AEgyptios, vt ab his dicendi initium faciamus, praeter vulgares litteras, tria adhuc alia characterum genera celebrantur, quibus ad mysteria sua condenda fuerunt usi. Diserte hoc celebris ille stromatum conditor, Clem. Alexandrinus (lib. v. Stromatum, pag. 563, edit. Paris, de an. 1612), docet, ita scribens. s: 'Qui docentur ab AEgyptiis primum quidem discunt AEgyptiarum litterarum viam ac rationem, quae vocatur [Greek: epizolographike], i.e., apta ad scribendas epistolas: secundam autem, sacerdotalem, qua vtuntur [Greek: hierogrammateis], i.e., qui de rebus sacris scribunt: vltimam autem [Greek: hierogluphiken], i.e., sacram, quae insculpitur, scripturam, cuius vna quidem est per prima elementa [Greek: kuriologike], i.e., propria loquens, altera vero symbolica, i.e., per signa significans.' Cum Clementi conferendus est Arabs Abenephi, cuius verba ita se habent: (Scriptum hoc Arabicum asseruatur in bibliotheca Vaticana, et typis nondum expressum est; ab Ath. Kirchero autem in Obelisco Pamphilio saepius citatur: vnde etiam ea, quae hic ex illo adduximus, depromta sunt.) 'Erant autem AEgyptus quatuor litterarum genera: primum erat in vsu apud populum et idiotas; secundum apud philosophos et sapientes: tertium erat mixtum ex litteris et symbolis sive imaginibus: quartum vsupabatur a sacerdotalibus, erant que litterae avium, quibus sacramenta indicabant divinitatis.' Ex quo posteriori testamento hoc discimus, quod erudite inter AEgyptios peculiari et a communibus litteris diuerso scripturae genere vsi sint ad doctrinas suas propagandas. Vti exempla ostendunt, constitit hoec scriptura partim ex certis sententiis et argutis symbolis, partim ex historicis fictionibus, secretiori docendi methodo accommodatis." ... "Omnes, qui de rebus diuinis tractarunt, tam Barbari quam Graeci rerum quidem principia occultaverint: veritatem autem aenigmatibus, signisque & symbolis, & allegoriis rursus, & metaphoris, & quibusdam tropis modisque tradiderunt."

[21] Exodus vii. 11, 12.

[22] Ibid vii. 22.

[23] Ibid viii. 7.

[24] Rheinisches Conversations-Lexicon. Koeln und Bonn. 1827. Vol. 7, page 432. "Magier, Magie, ein urspruenglich medischer Volksstamm, dem, der Sitte des Orients zufolge, die Erhaltung der wissenschaftlichen Kenntnisse und die Ausuebung der heiligen Gebraeuche der Religion ueberlassen war; nachher im speziellen Sinne die Priesterkaste der Perser und Meder. Der Name kommt aus dem Pehlei; Mag oder Mog heisst in dieser Sprache ueberhaupt ein Priester. Als eigner Stamm der Meder werden sie ausdruecklich von Herodot erwaehnt. Zoroaster war nicht der Stifter, sondern nur der Reformator der Magier oder vielmehr ihrer Lehrsaetze. Daher widersetzten sich die zu seiner Zeit vorhandenen Magier anfangs seinen Neuerungen und werden von ihm verstucht. Nachdem sie seine Verbesserungen angenommen hatten, organisirte er auch ihre inneren Einrichtungen und theilte sie in Lehrlinge, Meister und vollendete Meister. Ihr Studium und ihre Wissenschaft bestand in der Beobachtung der heiligen Gebraeuche, in der Kenntniss der heiligen Gebetformeln oder Liturgien, mit denen Ormuzd verehrt wurde; und der bei Gebeten und Opfern gebraeuchlichen Zeremonien. Nur durch sie konnte man Gebete und Opfer der Gottheit darbringen; nur sie waren die Mittelpersonen zwischen der Gottheit und den Menschen; nur ihnen offenbarte jene ihren Willen; nur sie blickten in die Zukunft, und enthuellten sie dem, der bei ihnen darnach forsichte. Spaeter hat man Magier ueberhaupt, Zauberer, Wundershaeter, Goldmacher und dergl. genannt."

[25] Heeren's Politics of Ancient Greece, ch. iii., p. 65. Bancroft, Amed., 1824.

[26] Delafield's Antiquities of America, pp. 69-71, et notae.

[27] Sir William Jones, vol. i., p. 92.

[28] Heeren's Politics of Ancient Greece: Am. ed., 1824, p. 64. Also Bryant's Ancient Mythology, ii., 390.

[29] Encyclopaedia Americana, vol. ix. (1835), p. 118.

[30] Gen. x. 8-12. This is adopting the marginal for the text reading of the passage, and the reason for it is this: The above is a clear historical account of those who journeyed to the plains of Shinar, which were only the descendants of Cush the father of Nimrod; though Asshur is said to have gone and builded the city of Nineveh, with the others mentioned in the text—which Asshur was one of the sons of Shem, who perhaps was blended by marriage, or other connections, with his relations the sons of Ham, unless it can be shown that there was one of that name in Ham's descendants as well as Shem's son. It was something particular (if correct) that Moses should bring in Asshur into his account of Ham's issue, because he was very strict in giving such relations of Japheth and Shem in their own places. Would Noah, who was so much disgusted at his son Ham as to curse him, permit the children of his other sons, whom he blessed, to have any communication with his children? Bishop Cumberland, in the last century, took some pains to unravel this, and concluded that the marginal translation in our bibles is the right one—that in the text being, "Out of that land went forth Asshur, and builded Nineveh", &c.; that in the margin, "And he [Nimrod] went out of that land into Assyria"—for Asshur generally in scripture signifies the Assyrian, excepting only in the genealogies: and in support of this he brings forward many authentic testimonies. (See Parsons's Remains of Japheth, p. 15: London, 1767.)

[31] Encyclopaedia Americana, title "Mysteries," vol. ix., p. 118.

[32] Deut. xviii. 10.

[33] Livy, iv., c. 22.

[34] 1 Sam. xxviii. 19.

[35] Eccles. xlvi.

[36] Lib. v., c. 92.

[37] Isaiah xxix. 4; also viii. 19.

[38] Alcestis, 1127.

[39] Oedipus, Act iii., 530.

[40] See Rufinius, i., 155.

[41] Phars., vi., 670. This writer proposes hereafter to publish an essay on the intercourse between the living and the dead, as connected with natural magic, even to the present day.

[42] Lib. i., El. ii., 45.

[43] Heeren. Politics Anc. Greece; Am. Ed., p. 68. See also page following.

[44] Rees' Cyclop. vol. vii. voc. "Chaldean Philosophy."

[45] Daniel ii.

[46] The true God, JAH, was God over the false deities, Baalim.

[47] Daniel v. 6, 7.

[48] Acts vii. 23.

[49] Disq. Hist. de variis modis occvlte scribendi, Helmstadt. MDccxxxvii. pp. 23-26. "Illud memorandum, quod Kabbalistarum antiquiores etiam ex figura quatuor linearum, quae inuicem sese intersecant, & in medio quadratum efficiunt, occultum scripturae genus excogitarint sequentem in modum. In singulis sectionibus tres collocant litteras a dextra ad sinistram. Quando igitur primam extribus intelligunt, figuram sectionis istuis, in qua reperitur, cum vno puncto scribunt; si alteram, eandam figuram cum duobus punctis; si tertiam, rursus eandem cum tribus punctis."

[50] "Illorum philosophia sublimis, quam Kabbalam vocant, diuersas sub se complectitur species, quarum quaedam huc pertinent. In famossissimo illo libello magico Rasiel, quem Kabbalistae in magna veneratione habent, tria imprimis secreta alphabeta leguntur, quae a communi Ebraicarum litterarum forma & ductu in multis abeunt. Primum vocatur scriptura coelestis; alterum scriptura angelorum sive regum; & tertium scriptura transitus fluvii.—Disq. Hist. &c., ibidem.

[51] Herm. Von der Hardt, celeberrimus aetatis nostrae philologus, duorum etiam singularium alphabetorum meminit, quibus Judaei in amuletis suis conficiendis utuntur. Primum est, si proxima semper pro proecedente substituitur littera, nimirum [Hebrew: B] pro [Hebrew: '], [Hebrew: G] pro [Hebrew: B] & sic porro. Hoctegere dicuntur confessionem suam de vno vero Deo, quam quotidie mane & circa vesperam recitant, & de qua sibi persuadent, quod effica cissimum contra idololatriam proesidium sit, quo quasi proemuniantur, ne a veritate ad falsam religionem desciscant. Alterum alphabetum occultum in eo consistit, quod ordine elementorum in uerso vltimam litteram [Hebrew: T] cum prima [Hebrew: '], & hanc cum illa vicissim permutent, & sic etiam reliquas: quam inversionem [Hebrew: 'TBSH] dicere moris est. Ex hoc maiusculis litteris in nobilioribus amuletis conspicuum symbolum [Hebrew: MTSPTS] conficiunt, quod nihil iterum aliud, quam nomen Dei [Hebrew: YHWH]. HIERONYMUS, non incelebris primae ecclesiae pater contendit (hereinafter quoted) prophetam Jeremiam hoc scribendi genere vsum fuisse, &, ne regem Babyloniae adversus Ebraeos irritaret, pro rege [Hebrew: BBL] dixisse [Hebrew: SHSHK]. Quin etiam sunt inter Judaeos, qui verba illa apud Danielem [Hebrew: MN' MN' TQL WPRSYN], quae super caenam regis Belsazaris e pariete per miraculum ad stuporem omnium prodibant, eodem modo scripta fuisse, atque iccirco hanc artificiosam litterarum transpositionem a Deo ipso primam originem suam trahere existimant. Sed incerta hoec & transeunda.

[52] Tom. iv. Oper. comment. in Jerem. cxxv., 26, p. 286, edit. Coloniens. de an. 1616.

[53] See Conf. Lud. Henr. Hillerus, in praefat. mysterii artis stenographicae nouissimi Vlmae an. 1682 editi.

[54] Breithaupt, Disq. Hist., p. 25, notis.

[55] 2 Chron. i. 12.

[56] Ezra vii. 1-6.

[57] Heb. ix. 4: and hereto agree Abarbanel on 1 Kings viii. 9, and R. Levi Ben Gersom.—Prideaux Conn. i. 297.

[58] Deut. xxxi. 26: Or, as others interpret it, "by the side of the ark." Mittzad. 1 Sam. vi. 8. 2 Kings xxii. 8. Prideaux i. 297.

[59] Prideaux i. 297.

[60] Vide Buxtorfii Synagogam. c. 14.

[61] 2 Maccabees ii.

[62] 2 Chron. xxxv. 3.

[63] Prideaux i. 303-'4. It were well to call to the reader's attention here, the remarkable subterranean discoveries made this year (1856), and still going on in Jerusalem, under the Austrian authorities there.

[64] Prideaux i. 285.

[65] Vol. i., Connex. pp. 383, 384.

[66] Isaiah xlv. 5-7.

[67] Prideaux, Con. i. 389.

[68] Page 25.

[69] Prideaux i. 338-'9.

[70] Plato in Alcibiade i. Stobases, p. 496. Clem. Alex. in Paedagogo i. p. 81.

[71] Prideaux Con. i. 395.

[72] Cicero de Divinatione, l. i. Philo Judaeus de spec. leg. Plutarch in Artaxerxe.

[73] Prideaux i. 404-'5.

[74] See page 21, antea.

[75] Heeren, Politics Anc. Greece, p. 292.

[76] Remains of Japheth, 136.

[77] A bad way to extirpate error. Education, reason, and piety will meet error openly.

[78] 2 Phil. ii. 9, 10.

[79] Matthew xv. 2, 3.

[80] Mark vii. 5-9.

[81] Coloss. ii. 8.

[82] 2 Thess. iii. 6, 7.

[83] Acts xx. 7, 8.

[84] John xx. 19.

[85] Neander, Gen. Hist. of Christ. Rel. &c., p. 98.

[86] Brev. Rom., p. 251. Lectio iij. infra Hebd. quartam Quadragesimae. "Audistis grande mysterium. Interroga hominem: Christianus es? Respondet tibi: non sum. Si paganus es, aut Judaeus? Si autem dixerit, non sum: adhuc quaeris ab eo, Catechumenus, an fidelis? Si responderet tibi, Catechumenus: inunctus est, nondum lotus. Sed unde inunctus? Quaere, et respondet. Quaere ab illo, in quem credat? Eo ipso quo Catechumenus est, dicit, In Christum. Ecce modo loquor et fidelibus et catechumenis. Quid dixi de sputo et luto? Quia verbum caro factum est; hoc catechumeni audiunt: sed non eis sufficit ad quod inuncti sunt: festinent ad lavacrum, si lumen inquirunt."

[87] Brev. Rom. p. 652. Festa Maji. Lectio viii. "Si ergo Nicodemus de illis multis erat qui crediderunt in nomine ejus, jam in isto Nicodemo attendamus, quare Jesus non se credebat eis. Respondit Jesus, et dixit ei: Amen, Amen dico tibi, nisi quis renatus fuerit denuo, non potest videre regnum Dei. Ipsis ergo se credit Jesus, qui nati fuerint denuo. Ecce illi crediderant in eum, et Jesus non se credebat eis. Tales sunt, omnes Catechumeni: ipsi jam credunt in nomine Christi, sed Jesus non se credit eis. Intendat et intelligat charitas vestra. Si dixerimus catechumeno: credis in Christum? Respondet, credo, et signat se cruce Christi: portat in fronte, et non erubescit de cruce Domini sui. Ecce credit in nomine ejus. Interrogemus cum: Manducas carnem filii hominis, et bibis sanguinem filii hominis? Nescit quid dicimus, quia Jesus non se credidit ei."

[88] 1 Corinth. iii. 1, 2.

[89] 1 Peter ii. 2.

[90] Hebrews v. 12-14.

[91] Hebrews vi. 1.

[92] Matt. x. 5, &c.

[93] John xviii. 36.

[94] Llorente, Hist. Span. Inq. London. 1827.

[95] Enc. Brit. xv. 674.

* * * * *

Corrections made to printed original.

p. 17. "Pharaoh, king of Egypt": 'Pharoah' in original. Also in Note 18.

p. 44. "more easily be employed": 'he' (for 'be') in original.

ibid. "the human mind is an emanation": 'humid' (for 'human') in original.

p. 49, diagram. Actual Hebrew letters in original. mem and tet are transposed, kaph and vav look just like resh. * = final forms.

p. 52, note "54". Footnote marker missing, inserted in what seems to me the most likely place.

p. 67. "kings should be subject to the laws": 'king' (ungrammatically) in original.

p. 72. "[Greek: episkopos] or bishop. [Greek: episkokos] in original.

p. 98. "All are bound to obey him implicitly": 'implicity' in original.

Note 20. "Christ. Breithaupt": 'Breithaurpt' in original. "MDccxxxvii": MD in apostrophus form in text. So also in note 49, where an apostrophus is put wrongly for the cc.

Notes 68, 74. The page numbers omitted in the original.

THE END