An Essay On The Origin Of Free Masonry

Thomas Paine, Freemason Or Deist?

By Shai Afsai

Thomas Paine (1737-1809) — who wrote and fought for American independence from England, encouraged the abolition of slavery,[i] helped shape Pennsylvania's constitution,[ii] advocated a restructuring of English government,[iii] argued against the death penalty,[iv] participated in France's legislature,[v] and "laid out the first design of a modern welfare state,"[vi] among other undertakings[vii] — has been described as "the first man to practice revolution as a sole reason for being."[viii]  While his life and texts have continued to offer encouragement in political struggles across the globe,[ix] questions remain about the nature of his affiliation with the influential and often intersecting movements of eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century Freemasonry and Deism.

What, then, was Thomas Paine's connection with the Masonic Order?  In Thomas Paine: Apostle of Freedom, Jack Fruchtman writes that there is insufficient evidence to answer this with certainty:  "It has long been questioned whether Paine was a member of the Masons.  There is no definitive proof either way.  There is no specific date known on which he joined nor a specific lodge to which he was attached."[x]  Nonetheless, Masonic membership has frequently been ascribed to him.  This is seen, for example, in the tendency of some American Grand Lodges, during the 1990's, to publish brochures that placed Paine on the roster of famous Masons.[xi]  "The Real Secret of Freemasonry," one such informational brochure put out by the Grand Lodge of Oregon, states: "The pantheon of Masons holds George Washington, Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Paine, among others."[xii]  Various Masonic Web-sites continue to make similar claims about Paine and Freemasonry, as well.[xiii] Paine biographer Bernard Vincent devotes a chapter of The Transatlantic Republican: Thomas Paine and the Age of Revolutions to "Thomas Paine, the Masonic Order, and the American Revolution,"[xiv] and offers several explanations for the inclination to consider him a Mason: While working on my Tom Paine biography, I was intrigued from the outset by the fact that all of a sudden, within just a few weeks or months, and as if by magic, Paine leaped from his obscure humdrum existence in England—where he had worked as a corset-maker and Excise officer—onto the American literary and political stage, there to become, at the age of almost forty, one of the leading lights of the Revolutionary movement.

How was it that a man who was little short of a failure in his native country became acquainted so rapidly with the most prominent figures in the Colonies, even becoming a friend of theirs in many cases?  How can one account for the quickness of his ascent and the suddenness of his glory? One way of accounting for this, one hypothesis (which has several times been made), is to consider that Paine became a Freemason and that, as such, he enjoyed, first in America, then in England and France, the kindly assistance of certain lodges or of certain individual Masons.[xv] Vincent himself rejects this hypothesis, however, due to a lack of corroborative evidence.  While it is certain that Washington and Franklin, for example, were Masons, there is no equivalent support for such a claim about Paine.  (Franklin, who provided Paine with a letter of introduction before the latter departed England for the American colonies, is discussed in greater detail below.) Assertions of Paine's Masonic membership also rest on the fact that between 1803 and 1805, after returning to America from England and France, he penned the essay "Origin of Free-Masonry."[xvi]  For some, Paine's curiosity about Freemasonry and his decision to write about it have been, in and of themselves, sufficient proof that he was a Mason.  However, Vincent rejects this line of reasoning as well: Paine's interest in Freemasonry was such that toward the end his life, in 1805, he wrote a lengthy piece entitled An Essay on the Origin of Freemasonry . . . But this does not prove, any more than any other detail or fact that we know of, that Paine was a Mason.  There is indeed no formal trace of his initiation or membership in England, none in America, and none in France.  Questioned about Paine's membership . . . the United Grand Lodge of England had only this to answer: "In the absence of any record of his initiation, it must, therefore, be assumed he was not a member of the order."[xvii] Apart from the question of his own membership in the fraternity, Paine certainly had several close friends who were members of the Order,[xviii] such as Nicolas de Bonneville.  Paine biographer Samuel Edwards depicts Bonneville as an active Mason who "was convinced that the principles and aims of Masonry, if applied to the world's ailments, would bring peace and prosperity to all nations."[xix]  While living in France, Paine resided at the home of Bonneville and his family, and Fruchtman suggests that Bonneville introduced Paine to the philosophies of Freemasonry and Theophilanthropism.[xx]  The bond between the two men was quite strong, and Bonneville's wife — Marguerite — and three sons (one of whom was named Thomas Paine Bonneville)[xxi] eventually followed Paine to America.[xxii] William M. VanderWeyde, in TheLife and Works of Thomas Paine, also mentions Paine's Masonic acquaintances, while at the same time emphasizing that Paine's friendships do not constitute evidence of his belonging to the fraternity: "Paine was the author of an interesting and highly instructive treatise on the Origin of Freemasonry . . . but, although many of his circle of friends were undoubtedly members of that order, no conclusive proof has ever been adduced that Paine was a Mason."[xxiii]  Likewise, Moncure Daniel Conway proposes that "Paine's intimacy in Paris with Nicolas de Bonneville and Charles Francoise Dupuis, whose writings are replete with masonic speculations, sufficiently explains his interest in the subject" of Freemasonry, though he himself was not a Mason.[xxiv] Marguerite de Bonneville published Paine's "Origin of Free-Masonry" in 1810, after his death, but chose to omit certain passages from it that were critical of Christianity.  (Despite his use of the Bible to support his arguments in such works as Common Sense and The Crisis, Paine was strongly opposed to Christianity, and indeed to organized religion in general, and sought to debunk the Bible in his later writings, including The Age of Reason.)[xxv]  Most of these omissions were restored in a subsequent printing, in 1818.[xxvi]

Paine's central premise in "Origin of Free-Masonry" is that the Order "is derived and is the remains of the religion of the ancient Druids; who, like the Magi of Persia and the Priests of Heliopolis in Egypt, were Priests of the Sun."[xxvii]  The idea that Freemasonry derived from the Druids did not begin with Paine and has been advanced by others after him.[xxviii]  According to Paine, however, this Druidic origin is the deepest secret of Freemasonry, from which its unique concealments and rituals extend: The natural source of secrecy is fear.  When any new religion over-runs a former religion, the professors of the new become the persecutors of the old . . . [W]hen the Christian religion over-ran the religion of the Druids . . . the Druids became the subject of persecution.  This would naturally and necessarily oblige such of them as remained attached to their original religion to meet in secret, and under the strongest injunctions of secrecy. Their safety depended upon it. A false brother might expose the lives of many of them to destruction; and from the remains of the religion of the Druids, thus preserved, arose the institution which, to avoid the name of Druid, took that of Mason, and practiced under this new name the rites and ceremonies of Druids.[xxix] Masonic author Albert G. Mackey quips in his History of Freemasonry that Paine "knew, by the way, as little of Masonry as he did of the religion of the Druids."[xxx]  He calls the essay "frivolous" and Paine "a mere sciolist in the subject of what he presumptuously sought to treat."[xxxi]  He is only slightly more charitable toward Paine in An Encyclopedia of Freemasonry and its Kindred Sciences, allowing that "[f]or one so little acquainted with his subject, he has treated it with considerable ingenuity."[xxxii]  Echoing this verdict, Masonic historian Joseph Fort Newton writes: "The notion that [Paine] was a Mason is probably due to the fact that he wrote an essay on Freemasonry, but the essay, while ingenious in its argument, betrays a vast incomprehension of the Order."[xxxiii]

Indeed, it is evident from "Origin of Free-Masonry" that Paine was not very knowledgeable of the Craft — though this does not in itself prove he was not a Mason when he wrote it.  Paine's general tone, however, shows him to be an outsider trying to assess what is in the Order, rather than a member of it, and that, more than anything else, indicates that he was not a Mason when he composed the essay.  For example, after referring to certain statements about Freemasonry made by the Provincial Grand Master of Kent, Captain George Smith, in the latter's The Use and Abuse of Free-Masonry (1783), Paine declares: It sometimes happens, as well in writing as in conversation, that a person lets slip an expression that serves to unravel what he intends to conceal, and this is the case with Smith, for in the same chapter he says, "The Druids, when they committed any thing to writing, used the Greek alphabet, and I am bold to assert that the most perfect remains of the Druids' rites and ceremonies are preserved in the customs and ceremonies of the Masons that are to be found existing among mankind."  "My brethren" says he, "may be able to trace them with greater exactness than I am at liberty to explain to the public." This is a confession from a Master Mason, without intending it to be so understood by the public, that Masonry is the remains of the religion of the Druids . . . [xxxiv] These are not the words of a man who is himself a Master Mason, but rather of one who is guessing at what secrets a Master Mason knows and may be inadvertently revealing.  Paine, as an outsider, mistakes Smith's personal conjecture for an inadvertent confession. If he was not a Master Mason when he wrote the essay, could Paine have been an Entered Apprentice or a Fellow-Craft?  It is difficult to argue that Paine was curious enough about Freemasonry's origin and philosophy to write seriously about the fraternity, and also to begin the Craft degrees, but that he did not wait until completing them before finishing his essay.  In fact, Paine opens "Origin of Free-Masonry" by contending that Master Masons are privy to information about the fraternity's origins of which other Masons are ignorant: The Society of Masons are distinguished into three classes or degrees. 1st. The Entered Apprentice. 2d. The Fellow Craft. 3d. The Master Mason. The Entered Apprentice knows but little more of Masonry than the use of signs and tokens, and certain steps and words by which Masons can recognize each other without being discovered by a person who is not a Mason. The Fellow Craft is not much better instructed in Masonry, than the Entered Apprentice. It is only in the Master Mason's Lodge, that whatever knowledge remains of the origin of Masonry is preserved and concealed.[xxxv]

Had he begun the Masonic degrees, Paine would presumably have sought all the first-hand knowledge they offered, and would have waited until he had gained access to it before concluding his essay.  It is likely that he was not at all a member of the fraternity during the essay's composition, and was writing as an outsider, although one with close associates within the Order. In a recent article on Paine and Freemasonry in the English quarterly Freemasonry Today, David Harrison speculates that "[i]f Paine did enter into Freemasonry, it would have been during the period of the American Revolution, his life being at the epicentre of the social elite at that time, his closeness to Franklin, Washington, Lafayette and Monroe suggesting that he was undoubtedly aware of their Masonic membership."[xxxvi]  Paine's "Origin of Free-Masonry," however, indicates that despite his closeness to these men, he did not, in fact, enter into Freemasonry then.  Years after the revolution, he wrote about the fraternity as an uninitiated outsider. Despite this, facets of Paine's thought may be said to correspond to certain Masonic principles.  In The Age of Reason — of which "Origin of Free-Masonry" may have originally been intended to be a part[xxxvii] — for example, Paine expounds his religious beliefs: I believe in one God, and no more; and I hope for happiness beyond this life. I believe the equality of man, and I believe that religious duties consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and endeavoring to make our fellow-creatures happy.[xxxviii]   Such statements, which Joseph Fort Newton felt had a Masonic ring to them, prompted him to write of Paine in The Builders: A Story and Study of Masonry: [T]hough not a Mason, [he] has left us an essay on The Origin of Freemasonry.  Few men have ever been more unjustly and cruelly maligned than this great patriot, who was the first to utter the name "United States," and who, instead of being a sceptic, believed in "the religion in which all men agree" — that is, in God, Duty, and the immortality of the Soul.[xxxix]

Similarly, Vincent maintains in The Transatlantic Republican that while Paine "probably never belonged to any specific fraternity, he nevertheless actively sympathized with the Masonic movement and the philosophy it espoused."  In Vincent's view, "Masonic thought had much in common with [Paine's] own deistic outlook and his own cult of reason."[xl]  The movements of Deism and Freemasonry often intersected in revolutionary France — where Fruchtman believes Paine was introduced to the Craft's philosophy — and in revolutionary America, where Herbert M. Morais contends that the "growth of deistic speculation was stimulated, not only by the spirit of the times, but also by the development of Freemasonry"[xli] and the infiltration of French culture.[xlii]  Despite the fact that "the American Masonic movement was . . . distinctly Christian both in tone and deed . . . nevertheless, its prayers, addresses, and constitutions were written in such a manner that its members were unconsciously familiarized with deistic phraseology . . . [and] with deistic expressions."[xliii] Paine's Deistic-sounding creed in The Age of Reason (and this creed as masonically paraphrased by Newton) is quite similar to one articulated by Franklin — a self-described Deist,[xliv] as well as a prominent Mason[xlv] — in his Autobiography: "That there is one God who made all things.  That he governs the World by his Providence.  That he ought to be worshipped by Adoration, Prayer & Thanksgiving.  But that the most acceptable Service of God is doing Good to Man.  That the Soul is immortal."[xlvi]  Although, as Robert P. Falk notes in "Thomas Paine: Deist or Quaker?," Paine "nowhere states outright, as Franklin does, that he was a Ôthorough Deist,' Paine speaks of the religion always in terms of intimate sympathy,"[xlvii] and "it seems safe to conclude that Ôthe creed of Paine' was . . . Ôthe purest deism.'"[xlviii] Unlike Franklin, however, who was cautious about disparaging any religion, focusing instead on what he held to be the beliefs common to all faiths,[xlix] Paine was not aiming for a generic religious doctrine.  Lacking what Vincent terms "the discreet Deism of leaders like Franklin or Jefferson," he was vocal in his opposition to organized religion,[l]  following his above-quoted creed in The Age of Reason with an attack: I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of.  My own mind is my own church. All national institutions of churches . . . appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.[li] Such declarations bought Paine many enemies, including among those who were formerly his friends.[lii]  The difference in Paine and Franklin's approaches to writing about the sensitive topic of theology can be seen as an extension of the difference in their character.  As Dixon Wecter describes it: Paine was a man whose keen though superficial genius included a rare personal gift for irritating all save a minority of kindred souls. Franklin's deeper and more stable character radiated a characteristic serenity; he was a master in the art of mollifying, with a pervasive charm as well as an essential common sense which Paine—despite his nom de plume—conspicuously lacked."[liii] Paine's confrontational religious approach is evident in "Origin of Free-Masonry," as well, where he writes that "the christian religion is a parody on the worship of the Sun, in which they put a man whom they call Christ, in the place of the Sun, and pay him the same adoration which was originally paid to the Sun."[liv]  Further on, he depicts Druidism as a "wise, elegant, philosophical religion . . . the faith opposite to the faith of the gloomy Christian church."[lv]  These sentiments, which had aroused so much anger while Paine lived, were what Madame Bonneville sought to remove from "Origin of Free-Masonry" when she published it after his death. Although Voltaire, for example, became a Mason shortly before passing away,[lvi] there is nothing to suggest that Paine became a Mason in the interval between composing "Origin of Free-Masonry" and his death a few years later, in 1809.  As he was certainly not a Master Mason when he wrote the essay — and as there is no evidence he joined the fraternity after then — one may conclude, as have Mackey, Newton, and others,[lvii] that Paine was not a Mason.  Still, though the "pantheon of Masons" does not include Thomas Paine, he remains connected to Freemasonry, if only due to his close friendships with members of the fraternity, to an affinity between aspects of its philosophy and his own outlook, and to his having written a distinctive essay on its origin.

[i]           NOTES This article expands on two earlier ones: "Thomas Paine and Masonry," Journal of Radical History 10:3 (2010); and "Thomas Paine's Masonic Essay and the Question of his Membership in the Fraternity," Philalethes 63:4 (Fall 2010). [i] Christopher Hitchens, Thomas Paine's Rights of Man: A Biography (New York: Atlantic Monthly Press, 2006), pp. 28-29 and 43-44; and Harry Harmer, Tom Paine: The Life of a Revolutionary (London: Haus Publishing, 2006), pp. 24-25.

[ii]           Isaac Kramnick's "Editor's Introduction" to Paine's Common Sense (London: Penguin, 1986), p. 31.

[iii]          Kramnick, "Editor's Introduction," p. 33.

[iv]          Hitchens, Thomas Paine's Rights of Man, p. 60.

[v]           Kramnick, "Editor's Introduction," pp. 34-36.

[vi]          Hitchens, Thomas Paine's Rights of Man, p. 109; see also p. 120.  Bernard Vincent devotes a chapter to "Paine's Agrarian Justice and the Birth of the Welfare State" in his The Transatlantic Republican:Thomas Paine and the Age of Revolutions (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2005), pp. 125-135.  Of the second part of Rights of Man, Harmer argues that Paine "described a scheme of universal social security financed through taxation, not perhaps a welfare state but one in which government took some action in the interest of all citizens." (Tom Paine, p. 80).

[vii]          For a further brief listing of Paine's accomplishments, see Vincent, The Transatlantic Republican, pp. 85-87 and 99-100; and Robert P. Falk, "Thomas Paine: Deist or Quaker?" The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography 62:1 (January 1938), p. 55.  Kramnick ("Editor's Introduction," p. 28) believes Paine also supported women's rights.  Hitchens, however, disagrees: "he was not a notable advocate of the rights of women" (Thomas Paine's Rights of Man, p. 98).  So does Vincent, who considers Paine's attitude toward women's suffrage to have been pedestrian: "unlike Mary Wollstonecraft, Paine never went so far as to advocate franchise for women . . . For once, Paine failed to be a prophet" (The Transatlantic Republican, p. 124).  Harmer sums up the matter well: "Paine showed himself to be an advanced thinker on the relationship between the sexes . . . Despite this, Paine remained enough of a prisoner of his time never to call for women to be given the vote" (Tom Paine, p. 25; see also p. 4).

[viii]         Jerome D. Wilson and William F. Ricketson, Thomas Paine (Boston: Twayne Publisher, 1978), p. 163.

[ix]          Hitchens, Thomas Paine's Rights of Man, pp. 141-142; and Vincent, The Transatlantic Republican, p. 107.

[x]           Jack Fruchtman, Jr., Thomas Paine: Apostle of Freedom (New York: Four Walls Eight Windows, 1994), p. 491, note 28.

[xi]          See "Famous Non-Masons" on the website Anti-Masonry: Points of View,

[xii]         "The Real Secret of Freemasonry," published by authority of the Trustees of The Grand Lodge of A.F. & A.M. of Oregon (U.S.A.: Still Associates, 1990).

[xiv]         Vincent, The Transatlantic Republican, pp. 35-58, with a selected bibliography on pp. 59-64.

[xv]          Vincent, The Transatlantic Republican, p. 35.

[xvi]         Jennifer N. Wunder, Keats, Hermeticism, and the Secret Societies (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008), p. 37.  Vincent (The Transatlantic Republican, p. 36) cites 1805 as the year "Origin of Free-Masonry" was written, as does Fruchtman (Thomas Paine: Apostle of Freedom, p. 49, note 29).  In contrast, William Van der Weyde places its writing in 1803.

[xvii]         Vincent, The Transatlantic Republican, p. 36.

[xviii]        Wunder describes how Diderot, Joseph Priestly, and Paine were "associated so closely and with so many Freemasons that they were grouped, de facto, with the Masons in publications of the period" (Keats, Hermeticism, and the Secret Societies, p. 35).

[xix]         Samuel Edwards, Rebel!A Biography of Tom Paine (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1974), p. 227.

[xx]          Fruchtman, Thomas Paine: Apostle of Freedom, pp. 275 and 379-380.  Paine was among the founders of the Society of Theophilanthropists (Friends of God and Man) in Paris.  See Harmer, Tom Paine, p. 99.

[xxi]         Harmer, Tom Paine, p. 99.

[xxii]         Fruchtman, Thomas Paine,pp. 275 and 394-395.

[xxiii]        William M. Van der Weyde, The Life and Works of Thomas Paine (New York: Thomas Paine National Historical Association, 1925), I, p. 171.

[xxiv]        Thomas Paine, "Origin of Free-Masonry," in The Writings of Thomas Paine (ed. Moncure Daniel Conway; New York: AMS Press, 1967 reprint), IV, p. 290, note 1.

[xxv]         See Hitchens, Thomas Paine's Rights of Man, pp. 124-125; and Vincent, The Transatlantic Republican, pp. 10, 89, 99, and 145.  Vincent notes (pp. 126 and 129) that Paine also based his later case for a welfare state on the Bible.

[xxvi]        Paine, "Origin of Free-Masonry," p. 290, note 1.

[xxvii]        Paine, "Origin of Free-Masonry," p. 293.

[xxviii]       Albert Gallatin Mackey addresses these ideas in his chapter on "Druidism and Freemasonry" in The History of Freemasonry (New York: The Masonic History Company, 1898), vol. 1, pp. 199-216.  See also Andrew Prescott's lecture on "Druidic Myths and Freemasonry," on the website of The Centre for Research into Freemasonry and Fraternalism,

[xxix]        Paine, "Origin of Free-Masonry," p. 303.

[xxx]         Mackey, The History of Freemasonry, I, p. 199.

[xxxi]        Mackey, The History of Freemasonry, I, p. 216.

[xxxii]        Mackey, An Encyclopedia of Freemasonry and its Kindred Sciences (Philadelphia: Moss and Company, 1874), p. 559.

[xxxiii]      Joseph Fort Newton, "Who's Who," The Builder Magazine 1:11 (November 1915), p. 276.

[xxxiv]       Paine, "Origin of Free-Masonry," pp. 294-295.

[xxxv]       Paine, "Origin of Free-Masonry," pp. 290-291.

[xxxvi]       David Harrison, "Thomas Paine, Freemason?," Freemasonry Today 46 (Autumn 2008),

[xxxvii]       Paine, "Origin of Free-Masonry," p. 290, note 1.

[xxxviii]      Paine, The Age of Reason: Being an Investigation of True and Fabulous Theology (Boston: Josiah P. Mendum, 1852), Part 1, p. 6.

[xxxix]      Newton, The Builders: A Story and Study of Masonry (Iowa: The Torch Press, 1916), pp. 225-226, note 3.

[xl]          Vincent, The Transatlantic Republican, p. 35.

[xli]          Herbert M. Morais, "Deism in Revolutionary America (1763-89)," International Journal of Ethics 42:4 (July 1932), p. 437.

[xlii]         Morais, "Deism in Revolutionary America (1763-89)," pp. 436, 437, 442, and 452.

[xliii]        Morais, "Deism in Revolutionary America (1763-89)," pp. 438-440.

[xliv]         In his Autobiography, Franklin writes: "I was scarce 15 when . . . Some Books against Deism fell into my Hands . . . It happened that they wrought an Effect on me quite contrary to what was intended by them; For the Arguments of the Deists which were quoted to be refuted, appeared to me much Stronger than the Refutations.  In short I soon became a thorough Deist . . . but I began to suspect that this Doctrine, tho' it might be true, was not very useful."  See Benjamin Franklin, The Autobiography and Other Writings (ed. Kenneth Silverman; New York: Penguin Books, 1986), pp. 62-63. David T. Morgan argues in "Benjamin Franklin: Champion of Generic Religion," The Historian 62:4 (June 2000), p. 723, that "no one to this very day is quite sure of Franklin's religious beliefs."  He maintains that while Franklin may be described as a Deist, his views included "personally tailored modifications of the Deist creed" (p. 728).  See also Morais, "Deism in Revolutionary America (1763-89)," pp. 448-449; and Harold E. Taussig, "Deism in Philadelphia During the Age of Franklin," Pennsylvania History, 37:3 (July 1970), pp. 217-218.

[xlv]         For an outline of Franklin's Masonic career, see Julius F. Sachse, "The Masonic Chronology of BenjaminFranklin," The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography 30:2 (1906), pp. 238-240.

[xlvi]         Franklin, The Autobiography and Other Writings, p. 104.

[xlvii]        Falk, "Thomas Paine: Deist or Quaker?" p. 55.

[xlviii]       Falk, "Thomas Paine: Deist or Quaker?" p. 60.

[xlix]         See David T. Morgan, "Benjamin Franklin: Champion of Generic Religion," The Historian 62:4 (June 2000), pp. 723-729.  See also Morais, "Deism in Revolutionary America (1763-89)," p. 449; and Taussig, "Deism in Philadelphia During the Age of Franklin," 218, 224, and 230-231. For an exception to Franklin's general approach, see Bryan LeBeau's "Franklin and the Presbyterians: Freedom of Conscience and the Need for Order," Early American Review (Summer 1996), .

[l]           Vincent, The Transatlantic Republican, p. 15.

[li]           Paine, The Age of Reason, Part 1, p. 6.

[lii]          Harmer, Tom Paine, p. 92; and Vincent, The Transatlantic Republican, pp. 16, 90, and 153.

[liii]         Dixon Wecter, "Thomas Paine and the Franklins," American Literature 12:3 (November 1940), p. 307.

[liv]          Paine, "Origin of Free-Masonry," p. 293.

[lv]          Paine, "Origin of Free-Masonry," p. 296.

[lvi]          Vincent, The Transatlantic Republican, p. 38; and R. William Weisberger, "Benjamin Franklin: A Masonic Enlightener in Paris," Pennsylvania History 53:3 (July 1986), pp. 168-169.

[lvii]         For another example, see Augustus C. L. Arnold's Philosophical History of Free-Masonry and Other Secret Societies (New York: Clark, Austen, and Smith, 1854), p. 204, first and second notes.  Arnold concludes that Paine was not "a member of the brotherhood."  Hex reproduces Paine's entire essay in his Philosophical History, adding his own notes to it with the aim of, among other things, correcting what he considers to be Paine's mistaken assertions about the fraternity.  He interprets Paine's essay as an attack on both Masonry and Christianity. See also the entry on Paine in William R. Denslow's 10,000 Famous Freemasons (New Orleans: Cornerstone Book Publishers, 2007), p. 329: "Although Paine wrote An Essay on the Origin of Freemasonry, he was not a Freemason . . . Certain writers have made claims that he was a member of various lodges both in America and France."


The Historical Library is provided for those doing research into the history of nontheism. It is not intended to be--and should not be used as--a source of modern, up-to-date information regarding atheistic issues. DO NOT CONTACT US ABOUT THESE DOCUMENTS. Please read the full Historical Library Disclaimer

Order books by Thomas Paine now.

[NOTE: This essay appeared in New York, 1818, with an anonymous preface of which I quote the opening paragraph: "This tract is a chapter belonging to the Third Part of the "Age of Reason," as will be seen by the references made in it to preceding articles, as forming part of the same work. It was culled from the writings of Mr. Paine after his death, and published in a mutilated state by Mrs. Bonneville, his executrix. Passages having a reference to the Christian religion she erased, with a view no doubt of accommodating the work to the prejudices of bigotry. These, however, have been restored from the original manuscript, except a few lines which were rendered illegible." Madame Bonneville published this fragment in New York, 1810 (with the omissions I point out) as a pamphlet. -- Dr. Robinet (Danton- Emigre, p. 7) says erroneously that Paine was a Freemason; but an eminent member of that Fraternity in London, Mr. George Briggs, after reading this essay, which I submitted to him, tells me that "his general outline, remarks, and comments, are fairly true." Paine's intimacy in Paris with Nicolas de Bonneville and Charles Frangois Dupuis, whose writings are replete with masonic speculations, sufficiently explain his interest in the subject. -- Editor.]

 


IT is always understood that Free-Masons have a secret which they carefully conceal; but from every thing that can be collected from their own accounts of Masonry, their real secret is no other than their origin, which but few of them understand; and those who do, envelope it in mystery

The Society of Masons are distinguished into three classes or degrees. 1st. The Entered Apprentice. 2d. The Fellow Craft. 3d. The Master Mason.

The Entered Apprentice knows but little more of Masonry than the use of signs and tokens, and certain steps and words by which Masons can recognize each other without being discovered by a person who is not a Mason. The Fellow Craft is not much better instructed in Masonry, than the Entered Apprentice. It is only in the Master Mason's Lodge, that whatever knowledge remains of the origin of Masonry is preserved and concealed.

In 1730, Samuel Pritchard, member of a constituted lodge in England, published a treatise entitled Masonry Dissected; and made oath before the Lord Mayor of London that it was a true copy. "Samuel Pritchard maketh oath that the copy hereunto annexed is a true and genuine copy in every particular." In his work he has given the catechism or examination, in question and answer, of the Apprentices, the Fellow Craft, and the Master Mason. There was no difficulty in doing this, as it is mere form.

In his introduction he says, "the original institution of Masonry consisted in the foundation of the liberal arts and sciences, but more especially in Geometry, for at the building of the tower of Babel, the art and mystery of Masonry was first introduced, and from thence handed down by Euclid, a worthy and excellent mathematician of the Egyptians; and he communicated it to Hiram, the Master Mason concerned in building Solomon's Temple in Jerusalem."

Besides the absurdity of deriving Masonry from the building of Babel, where, according to the story, the confusion of languages prevented the builders understanding each other, and consequently of communicating any knowledge they had, there is a glaring contradiction in point of chronology in the account he gives.

Solomon's Temple was built and dedicated 1004 years before the christian era; and Euclid, as may be seen in the tables of chronology, lived 277 before the same era. It was therefore impossible that Euclid could communicate any thing to Hiram, since Euclid did not live till 700 years after the time of Hiram.

In 1783, Captain George Smith, inspector of the Royal Artillery Academy at Woolwich, in England, and Provincial Grand Master of Masonry for the county of Kent, published a treatise entitled, The Use and Abuse of Free-Masonry.

In his chapter of the antiquity of Masonry, he makes it to be coeval with creation, "when," says he, "the sovereign architect raised on Masonic principles the beauteous globe, and commanded the master science, Geometry, to lay the planetary world, and to regulate by its laws the whole stupendous system in just unerring proportion, rolling round the central sun."

"But," continues he, "I am not at liberty publicly to undraw the curtain, and openly to descant on this head; it is sacred, and ever will remain so; those who are honored with the trust will not reveal it, and those who are ignorant of it cannot betray it." By this last part of the phrase, Smith means the two inferior classes, the Fellow Craft and the Entered Apprentice, for he says in the next page of his work, "It is not every one that is barely initiated into Free-Masonry that is entrusted with all the mysteries thereto belonging; they are not attainable as things of course, nor by every capacity."

The learned, but unfortunate Doctor Dodd, Grand Chaplain of Masonry, in his oration at the dedication of Free-Mason's Hall, London, traces Masonry through a variety of stages. Masons, says he, are well informed from their own private and interior records that the building of Solomon's Temple is an important era, from whence they derive many mysteries of their art. "Now (says he,) be it remembered that this great event took place above 1000 years before the Christian era, and consequently more than a century before Homer, the first of the Grecian Poets, wrote; and above five centuries before Pythagoras brought from the east his sublime system of truly masonic instruction to illuminate. our western world. But, remote as this period is, we date not from thence the commencement of our art. For though it might owe to the wise and glorious King of Israel some of its many mystic forms and hieroglyphic ceremonies, yet certainly the art itself is coeval with man, the great subject of it. "We trace," continues he, "its footsteps in the most distant, the most remote ages and nations of the world. We find it among the first and most celebrated civilizers of the East. We deduce it regularly from the first astronomers on the plains of Chaldea, to the wise and mystic kings and priests of Egypt, the sages of Greece, and the philosophers of Rome."

From these reports and declarations of Masons of the highest order in the institution, we see that Masonry, without publicly declaring so, lays claim to some divine communication from the creator, in a manner different from, and unconnected with, the book which the christians call the bible; and the natural result from this is, that Masonry is derived from some very ancient religion, wholly independent of and unconnected with that book.

To come then at once to the point, Masonry (as I shall show from the customs, ceremonies, hieroglyphics, and chronology of Masonry) is derived and is the remains of the religion of the ancient Druids; who, like the Magi of Persia and the Priests of Heliopolis in Egypt, were Priests of the Sun. They paid worship to this great luminary, as the great visible agent of a great invisible first cause whom they styled " Time without limits." [NOTE: Zarvan-Akarana. This personification of Boundless Time, though a part of Parsee Theology, seems to be a later monotheistic dogma, based on perversions of the Zendavesta. See Haug's "Religion of the Parsees." -- Editor.]

The christian religion and Masonry have one and the same common origin: both are derived from the worship of the Sun. The difference between their origin is, that the christian religion is a parody on the worship of the Sun, in which they put a man whom they call Christ, in the place of the Sun, and pay him the same adoration which was originally paid to the Sun, as I have shown in the chapter on the origin of the Christian religion. [NOTE: Referring to an unpublished portion of the work of which this chapter forms a part. -- American Editor, 1819 [This paragraph is omitted from the pamphlet copyrighted by Madame Bonneville in 1810, as also is the last sentence of the next paragraph. -- Editor.]

In Masonry many of the ceremonies of the Druids are preserved in their original state, at least without any parody. With them the Sun is still the Sun; and his image, in the form of the sun is the great emblematical ornament of Masonic Lodges and Masonic dresses. It is the central figure on their aprons, and they wear it also pendant on the breast in their lodges, and in their processions. It has the figure of a man, as at the head of the sun, as Christ is always represented.

At what period of antiquity, or in what nation, this religion was first established, is lost in the labyrinth of unrecorded time. It is generally ascribed to the ancient Egyptians, the Babylonians and Chaldeans, and reduced afterwards to a system regulated by the apparent progress of the sun through the twelve signs of Zodiac by Zoroaster the law giver of Persia, from whence Pythagoras brought it into Greece. It is to these matters Dr. Dodd refers in the passage already quoted from his oration.

The worship of the Sun as the great visible agent of a great invisible first cause, "Time without limits," spread itself over a considerable part of Asia and Africa, from thence to Greece and Rome, through all ancient Gaul, and into Britain and Ireland.

Smith, in his chapter on the antiquity of Masonry in Britain, says, that "notwithstanding the obscurity which envelopes Masonic history in that country, various circumstances contribute to prove that Free-Masonry was introduced into Britain about 1030 Years before Christ." It cannot be Masonry in its present state that Smith here alludes to. The Druids flourished in Britain at the period he speaks of, and it is from them that Masonry is descended. Smith has put the child in the place of the parent.

It sometimes happens, as well in writing as in conversation, that a person lets slip an expression that serves to unravel what he intends to conceal, and this is the case with Smith, for in the same chapter he says, "The Druids, when they committed any thing to writing, used the Greek alphabet, and I am bold to assert that the most perfect remains of the Druids' rites and ceremonies are preserved in the customs and ceremonies of the Masons that are to be found existing among mankind." "My brethren" says he, "may be able to trace them with greater exactness than I am at liberty to explain to the public."

This is a confession from a Master Mason, without intending it to be so understood by the public, that Masonry is the remains of the religion of the Druids; the reasons for the Masons keeping this a secret I shall explain in the course of this work.

As the study and contemplation of the Creator [is] in the works of the creation, the Sun, as the great visible agent of that Being, was the visible object of the adoration of Druids; all their religious rites and ceremonies had reference to the apparent progress of the Sun through the twelve signs of the Zodiac, and his influence upon the earth. The Masons adopt the same practices. The roof of their Temples or Lodges is ornamented with a Sun, and the floor is a representation of the variegated face of the earth either by carpeting or Mosaic work.

Free Masons Hall, in Great Queen-street, Lincoln's Inn Fields, London, is a magnificent building, and cost upwards of 12,000 pounds sterling. Smith, in speaking of this building, says (page 152,) "The roof of this magnificent Hall is in all probability the highest piece of finished architecture in Europe. In the center of this roof, a most resplendent Sun is represented in burnished gold, surrounded with the twelve signs of the Zodiac, with their respective characters;

 

Aries Libra Taurus Scorpio Gemini Sagittarius Cancer Capricorns Leo Aquarius Virgo Pisces After giving this description, he says, "The emblematical meaning of the Sun is well known to the enlightened and inquisitive Free-Mason; and as the real Sun is situated in the center of the universe, so the emblematical Sun is the center of real Masonry. We all know (continues he) that the Sun is the fountain of light, the source of the seasons, the cause of the vicissitudes of day and night, the parent of vegetation, the friend of man; hence the scientific Free-Mason only knows the reason why the Sun is placed in the center of this beautiful hall."

The Masons, in order to protect themselves from the persecution of the christian church, have always spoken in a mystical manner of the figure of the Sun in their Lodges, or, like the astronomer Lalande, who is a Mason, been silent upon the subject. It is their secret, especially in Catholic countries, because the figure of the Sun is the expressive criterion that denotes they are descended from the Druids, and that wise, elegant, philosophical religion, was the faith opposite to the faith of the gloomy Christian church. [NOTE: This sentence is omitted in Madame Bonneville's publication. -- Editor.]

The Lodges of the Masons, if built for the purpose, are constructed in a manner to correspond with the apparent motion of the Sun. They are situated East and West. [NOTE: The Freemason's Hall in London, which Paine has correctly described, is situated North and South, the exigencies of the space having been too strong for Masonic orthodoxy. Though nominally eastward the Master stands at the South. -- Editor.] The master's place is always in the East. In the examination of an Entered Apprentice, the Master, among many other questions, asks him,

 

Q: How is the lodge situated?
A: East and West.
Q: Why so?
A: Because all churches and chapels are, or ought to be so."

 

This answer, which is mere catechismal form, is not an answer to the question. It does no more than remove the question a point further, which is, why ought all churches and chapels to be so? But as the Entered Apprentice is not initiated into the druidical mysteries of Masonry, he is not asked any questions a direct answer to which would lead thereto.

 

Q: Where stands your Master?
A: In the East.
Q: Why so?
A: As the Sun rises in the East and opens the day, so the Master stands in the East, (with his right hand upon his left breast, being a sign, and the square about his neck,) to open the Lodge, and set his men at work.

Q: Where stand your Wardens?
A: In the West.
Q: What is their business?
A: As the Sun sets in the West to close the day, so the Wardens stand in the West, (with their right hands upon their left breasts, being a sign, and the level and plumb rule about their necks,) to close the Lodge, and dismiss the men from labor, paying them their wages."

 

Here the name of the Sun is mentioned, but it is proper to observe that in this place it has reference only to labor or to the time of labor, and not to any religious druidical rite or ceremony, as it would have with respect to the situation of Lodges East and West. I have already observed in the chapter on the origin of the christian religion, that the situation of churches East and West is taken from the worship of the Sun, which rises in the east, and has not the least reference to the person called Jesus Christ. The christians never bury their dead on the North side of a church; [NOTE: In many parts of Northern Europe the North was supposed to be the region of demons. Executed criminals were buried on the north side of churches. -- Editor.] and a Mason's Lodge always has, or is supposed to have, three windows which are called fixed lights, to distinguish them from the moveable lights of the Sun and the Moon. The Master asks the Entered Apprentice,

 

Q: How are they (the fixed lights) situated?
A: East, West, and South.
Q: What are their uses?
A: To light the men to and from their work.
Q: Why are there no lights in the North?
A: Because the Sun darts no rays from thence."

 

This, among numerous other instances, shows that the christian religion and Masonry have one and the same common origin, the ancient worship of the Sun.

The high festival of the Masons is on the day they call St. John's day; but every enlightened Mason must know that holding their festival on this day has no reference to the person called St. John, and that it is only to disguise the true cause of holding it on this day, that they call the day by that name. As there were Masons, or at least Druids, many centuries before the time of St. John, if such person ever existed, the holding their festival on this day must refer to some cause totally unconnected with John.

The case is, that the day called St. John's day, is the 24th of June, and is what is called Midsummer-day. The sun is then arrived at the summer solstice; and, with respect to his meridional altitude, or height at high noon, appears for some days to be of the same height. The astronomical longest day, like the shortest day, is not every year, on account of leap year, on the same numerical day, and therefore the 24th of June is always taken for Midsummer-day; and it is in honor of the sun, which has then arrived at his greatest height in our hemisphere, and not any thing with respect to St. John, that this annual festival of the Masons, taken from the Druids, is celebrated on Midsummer-day.

Customs will often outlive the remembrance of their origin, and this is the case with respect to a custom still practiced in Ireland, where the Druids flourished at the time they flourished in Britain. On the eve of Saint John's day, that is, on the eve of Midsummer-day, the Irish light fires on the tops of the hills. This can have no reference to St. John; but it has emblematical reference to the sun, which on that day is at his highest summer elevation, and might in common language be said to have arrived at the top of the hill.

As to what Masons, and books of Masonry, tell us of Solomon's Temple at Jerusalem, it is no wise improbable that some Masonic ceremonies may have been derived from the building of that temple, for the worship of the Sun was in practice many centuries before the Temple existed, or before the Israelites came out of Egypt. And we learn from the history of the Jewish Kings, 2 Kings xxii. xxiii. that the worship of the Sun was performed by the Jews in that Temple. It is, however, much to be doubted if it was done with the same scientific purity and religious morality with which it was performed by the Druids, who, by all accounts that historically remain of them, were a wise, learned, and moral class of men. The Jews, on the contrary, were ignorant of astronomy, and of science in general, and if a religion founded upon astronomy fell into their hands, it is almost certain it would be corrupted. We do not read in the history of the Jews, whether in the Bible or elsewhere, that they were the inventors or the improvers of any one art or science. Even in the building of this temple, the Jews did not know how to square and frame the timber for beginning and carrying on the work, and Solomon was obliged to send to Hiram, King of Tyre (Zidon) to procure workmen; "for thou knowest, (says Solomon to Hiram, i Kings v. 6.) that there is not among us any that can skill to hew timber like unto the Zidonians." This temple was more properly Hiram's Temple than Solomon's, and if the Masons derive any thing from the building of it, they owe it to the Zidonians and not to the Jews. -- But to return to the worship of the Sun in this Temple.

It is said, 2 Kings xxiii. 5, "And [king Josiah] put down all the idolatrous priests ... that burned incense unto ... the sun, the moon, the planets, and all the host of heaven." And it is said at the 11th verse: "And he took away the horses that the kings of Judah had given to the Sun, at the entering in of the house of the Lord, ... and burned the chariots of the Sun with fire"; verse 13, "And the high places that were before Jerusalem, which were on the right hand of the mount of corruption, which Solomon the king of Israel had builded for Ashtoreth, the abomination of the Zidonians" (the very people that built the temple) "did the king defile."

Besides these things, the description that Josephus gives of the decorations of this Temple, resembles on a large scale those of a Mason's Lodge. He says that the distribution of the several parts of the Temple of the Jews represented all nature, particularly the parts most apparent of it, as the sun, the moon, the planets, the zodiac, the earth, the elements; and that the system of the world was retraced there by numerous ingenious emblems. These, in all probability, are, what Josiah, in his ignorance, calls the abominations of the Zidonians. [NOTE by PAINE: Smith, in speaking of a Lodge, says, when the Lodge is revealed to an entering Mason, it discovers to him a representation of the World; in which, from the wonders of nature, we are led to contemplate her great original, and worship him from his mighty works; and we are thereby also moved to exercise those moral and social virtues which become mankind as the servants of the great Architect of the world. -- Author.] Every thing, however, drawn from this Temple [NOTE by PAINE: It may not be improper here to observe, that the law called the law of Moses could not have been in existence at the time of building this Temple. Here is the likeness of things in heaven above and in earth beneath. And we read in I Kings vi., vii., that Solomon made cherubs and cherubims, that he carved all the walls of the house round about with cherubims, and palm-trees, and open flowers, and that he made a molten sea, placed on twelve oxen, and the ledges of it were ornamented with lions, oxen, and cherubims: all this is contrary to the law called the law of Moses. -- Author.] and applied to Masonry, still refers to the worship of the Sun, however corrupted or misunderstood by the Jews, and consequently to the religion of the Druids.

Another circumstance, which shows that Masonry is derived from some ancient system, prior to and unconnected with the christian religion, is the chronology, or method of counting time, used by the Masons in the records of their Lodges. They make no use of what is called the christian era; and they reckon their months numerically, as the ancient Egyptians did, and as the Quakers do now. I have by me, a record of a French Lodge, at the time the late Duke of Orleans, then Duke de Chartres, was Grand Master of Masonry in France. It begins as follows: "Le trentieme jour du sixieme mois de l'an de la V.L. cinq mille sept cent soixante treize;" that is, the thirteenth day of the sixth month of the year of the Venerable Lodge, five thousand seven hundred and seventy-three. By what I observe in English books of Masonry, the English Masons use the initials A.L. and not V.L. By A.L. they mean in the year of Light, as the Christians by A.D. mean in the year of our Lord. But A.L. like V.L. refers to the same chronological era, that is, to the supposed time of the creation. [NOTE: V.L. are the initials of Vraie Lumiere, true light; and A.L. of Anne Lucis, in the year of light. This and the three preceding sentences (of the text) are suppressed in Madame Bonneville's pamphlet, 1810. -- Editor.] In the chapter on the origin of the Christian religion, I have shown that the Cosmogony, that is, the account of the creation with which the book of Genesis opens, has been taken and mutilated from the Zend-Avesta of Zoroaster, and was fixed as a preface to the Bible after the Jews returned from captivity in Babylon, and that the Robbins of the Jews do not hold their account in Genesis to be a fact, but mere allegory. The six thousand years in the Zend-Avesta, is changed or interpolated into six days in the account of Genesis. The Masons appear to have chosen the same period, and perhaps to avoid the suspicion and persecution of the Church, have adopted the era of the world, as the era of Masonry. The V.L. of the French, and A.L. of the English Mason, answer to the A.M. Anno Mundi, or year of the world.

Though the Masons have taken many of their ceremonies and hieroglyphics from the ancient Egyptians, it is certain they have not taken their chronology from thence. If they had, the church would soon have sent them to the stake; as the chronology of the Egyptians, like that of the Chinese, goes many thousand years beyond the Bible chronology.

The religion of the Druids, as before said, was the same as the religion of the ancient Egyptians. The priests of Egypt were the professors and teachers of science, and were styled priests of Heliopolis, that is, of the City of the Sun. The Druids in Europe, who were the same order of men, have their name from the Teutonic or ancient German language; the German being anciently called Teutones. The word Druid signifies a wise man. [NOTE: German drud, wizard. Cf. Milton's line: "The star-led wizards haste with odours sweet." The word Druid has also been derived from Greek ####;, an oak; Celtic 'deru,' an oak and 'ndd,' lord; British 'deruidhon,' very wise men; Heb. 'derussim,' contemplators; etc. -- Editor.] In Persia they were called Magi, which signifies the same thing.

Egypt," says Smith, "from whence we derive many of our mysteries, has always borne a distinguished rank in history, and was once celebrated above all others for its antiquities, learning, opulence, and fertility. In their system, their principal hero- gods, Osiris and Isis, theologically represented the Supreme Being and universal Nature; and physically the two great celestial luminaries, the Sun and the Moon, by whose influence all nature was actuated." "The experienced brethren of the society, [says Smith in a note to this passage] are well informed what affinity these symbols bear to Masonry, and why they are used in all Masonic Lodges." In speaking of the apparel of the Masons in their Lodges, part of which, as we see in their public processions, is a white leather apron, he says, "the Druids were apparelled in white at the time of their sacrifices and solemn offices. The Egyptian priests of Osiris wore snow-white cotton. The Grecian and most other priests wore white garments. As Masons, we regard the principles of those 'who were the first worshipers of the true God,' imitate their apparel, and assume the badge of innocence."

"The Egyptians," continues Smith, "in the earliest ages constituted a great number of Lodges, but with assiduous care kept their secrets of Masonry from all strangers. These secrets have been imperfectly handed down to us by oral tradition only, and ought to be kept undiscovered to the laborers, craftsmen, and apprentices, till by good behavior and long study they become better acquainted in geometry and the liberal arts, and thereby qualified for Masters and Wardens, which is seldom or never the case with English Masons."

Under the head of Free-Masonry, written by the astronomer Lalande, in the French Encyclopedia, I expected from his great knowledge in astronomy, to have found much information on the origin of Masonry; for what connection can there be between any institution and the Sun and twelve signs of the Zodiac, if there be not something in that institution, or in its origin, that has reference to astronomy? Every thing used as an hieroglyphic has reference to the subject and purpose for which it is used; and we are not to suppose the Free-Masons, among whom are many very learned and scientific men, to be such idiots as to make use of astronomical signs without some astronomical purpose. But I was much disappointed in my expectation from Lalande. In speaking of the origin of Masonry, he says, "L'orgine de la maconnerie se Perd, comme tant d'autres, dans l'obscurite des termps;" That is, the origin of Masonry, like many others, loses itself in the obscurity of time. When I came to this expression, I supposed Lalande a Mason, and on enquiry found he was. This passing over saved him from the embarrassment which Masons are under respecting the disclosure of their origin, and which they are sworn to conceal. There is a society of Masons in Dublin who take the name of Druids; these Masons must be supposed to have a reason for taking that name.

I come now to speak of the cause of secrecy used by the Masons.

The natural source of secrecy is fear. When any new religion over-runs a former religion, the professors of the new become the persecutors of the old. We see this in all instances that history brings before us. When Hilkiah the priest and Shaphan the scribe, in the reign of King Josiah, found, or pretended to find, the law, called the law of Moses, a thousand years after the time of Moses, (and it does not appear from 2 Kings, xxii., xxiii., that such a law was ever practiced or known before the time of Josiah), he established that law as a national religion, and put all the priests of the Sun to death. When the christian religion over-ran the Jewish religion, the Jews were the continual subject of persecution in all christian countries. When the Protestant religion in England over-ran the Roman Catholic religion, it was made death for a Catholic priest to be found in England. As this has been the case in all the instances we have any knowledge of, we are obliged to admit it with respect to the case in question, and that when the christian religion over-ran the religion of the Druids in Italy, ancient Gaul, Britain, and Ireland, the Druids became the subject of persecution. This would naturally and necessarily oblige such of them as remained attached to their original religion to meet in secret, and under the strongest injunctions of secrecy. Their safety depended upon it. A false brother might expose the lives of many of them to destruction; and from the remains of the religion of the Druids, thus preserved, arose the institution which, to avoid the name of Druid, took that of Mason, and practiced under this new name the rites and ceremonies of Druids.

Order books by Thomas Paine now.

/library/historical/disclaimer.html

The Historical Library is provided for those doing research into the history of nontheism. It is not intended to be--and should not be used as--a source of modern, up-to-date information regarding atheistic issues. DO NOT CONTACT US ABOUT THESE DOCUMENTS. Please read the full Historical Library Disclaimer

Top

Leave a Comment

(0 Comments)

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *