The French Revolution is possibly one of the most important and defining moments in recent European history, and alongside the industrial revolution and the advancement in science, it is not far fetched to state that it gave birth to the modern age.
But, how influential was Freemasonry in the French Revolution? Many of the leaders and notable figures of the Revolution were Freemasons. The Marquiss de Lafayette, who had helped the Americans in their Revolution against the British, was a Freemason to put but one example. And the American Revolution was in great measure a Masonic Revolution. Many of the signatories of the new American Constitution were Freemasons, and the Masonic spirit of the American Constitution cannot be denied. But in France, things were different. The truth is that between 1793 and 1796, which were the more turbulent years of the French Revolution, the Grand Orient de France suspended all Masonic activities.
Although there are some parallelisms between Freemasonry and the ideals of the French Revolution, Freemasonry advocates equality, tolerance, respect
and obedience to the rule of law and because of this it
cannot ever be mixed up in plots, conspiracies or revolutions. Although, sometimes one must fight to defend these sacred values, particularly during such tumultuous periods.
Some readers may believe that the motto of French or
continental Freemasonry still in use to date, “Liberty,
Equality and Fraternity” was taken straight out of the
French Revolution, but the fact is that Freemasonry only adopted this motto after the Paris Commune of 1848.
I am not suggesting for a moment that there isn’t a direct connection, small as it may be, between French Freemasonry in the 18th Century and the French Revolution, but it is almost an anecdotal connection punctuated with some rather odd peculiarities such as Robespierre’s "Cult of the Supreme Being" with its unfortunate Masonic resonance (although it's not impossible that Robespierre was a Freemason, there's no evidence whatsoever to confirm this).
We have to differentiate between lodges carrying out Masonic work and lodges being misused for political reasons in which the discretion and secrecy of Freemasonry were being blatantly abused. The
French Revolution took many Freemasons to the guillotine, whereas others had to emigrate to save their lives. Others prospered but this had nothing to do with
their Masonic membership, rather it was down to their
social and political circumstances as individuals. Rather a matter of political connection and being in the right place in the right time.
In the words of Masonic historian Jose Antonio Benimelli:
"Freemasonry was one of the first associations that suffered the consequences of the French Revolution. All one has to do is read the lists of Freemasons from Paris, members of the Grand Orient de France published at the end of the 18thC by Bihan to see how many emigrated, were subjected to deportation or executed. Most lodges had to cease their activities and from 1791 onwards the Grand Lodge de France stopped working. The Grand Orient de France followed suit in 1793. The few lodges that continued to operate in spite of all this had to become “revolutionary clubs” as was the case with the Amis de la Liberte
in Paris and the Bonne Amitie of Marseille."
The famous Lodge of the Nine Sisters had members
such Benjamin Franklin, Camille Desmoulins and Voltaire amongst its ranks and because of these famous members, the lodge
has been associated with this narrative ofFreemasonry
and Revolution. And rightly so, I might add, since it's not difficult to imagine the sort of profane matters that would be discussed by the members of this lodge.
Founded in 1776, the lodge was consecrated to promote philosophical and educational values aligned with the Enlightenment.
As mentioned, Masonic values reflect the values of the Age of Reason and, by extension, some of the Revolutionary aims of the period. These were not one and the same, but neither were mutually exclusive.
Freemasonry wasn't behind the French Revolution or better put, Freemasonry wasn't the cause of the French Revolution. It just so happened that Freemasonry was very popular in the Age of Enlightenment and many figures involved in the French Revolution were Freemasons. Some were monarchists such as Lafayette and Mirabeau; others like Danton and Marat were more radical. There were also Freemasons such as the Count François Henri de Virieu and the Duke Montmorency-Luxembourg
among many others who openly opposed the French
Revolution.
Having said this, the French Revolution was a blood bath. But aren't all Revolutions bloody and violent by definition? If we reflect on the fate of Luis the XVI and many other figures of authority that didn't deserve such a tragic end, it is easy to be biased. From the more evolved and less barbaric XXI ( we hope) we can proclaim loudly that nobody deserves such a fate. But, if we put ourselves in the minds of the people of the period (an impossible and even ridiculous task, I know) I believe that for change to occur, the dithering of the early months of the Estates General and the National Assembly had to change into decisive action of some kind. The King had plenty of chances of escaping or staying and playing ball with the new order, in which case the moderate faction of the National Assembly would have been more than cooperative with him. But after his failed escape to Varennes and the fatidic letter he left behind denouncing the Revolution and showing his desire to return to the Ancient regime through violent force...well...what were the Revolutionaries to do?
Comments
Post a Comment