Freemasonry and Lucifer

Anti-Mason Robert Morey, "From the very beginning, English Masonry has always had many notable clergymen in its ranks. The idea that they would permit the worship of Satan or Isis in the English Lodge is ridiculous." (The Truth About Masons, page 81)


Lucifer, the god of Freemasonry?
Anti-Masons David and Donna Carrico, Followers of Jesus Christ Ministries, write, "Manly P. Hall and Albert Pike, two of the greatest Masonic authorities of all time reveal the true god of Freemasonry." (Christian Worker's Handbook: The Guide for Ministry to Masons, page 45.)

Albert Pike and Manly Hall were not "the greatest Masonic authorities of all time." Their writings are not accepted as authoritative. In their writings they used the term "lucifer" in its classical or literary sense to refer to a search for knowledge. As John J. Robinson pointed out in "A Pilgrim's Path," "The emphasis here should be on intent. When Albert Pike and other Masonic scholars spoke over a century ago about the 'Luciferian path,' or the 'energies of Lucifer,' they were referring to the morning star, the light bearer, the search for light; the very antithesis of dark, satanic evil."

Gary Leazer writes, "Pike refers to Lucifer six times, the Devil eight times, and Satan twenty-two times in 'Morals and Dogma.' After examining each of the thirty-six times Lucifer, the Devil, or Satan is used, there is no evidence that Pike was Luciferian or that he believed Lucifer was God. For the majority of the times Lucifer, the Devil, or Sata were cited, they were cited, they were references to how an individual or religion, such as Gnosticism or the Manichaeans, used the name." (Fundamentalism & Freemasonry, page 163)

Rex Hutchens, ". . . because Pike's work compares the world's religions, he regularly recites the character of Satan as understood by by major faiths, whether Gnostics (p. 561), Jewish (p. 102), or Persian (pp. 257-258). His descriptions are uniformaly negative, hardly to be expected from a disciple of the Evil One.
If it were true, as alleged by anti-Masons, that Satanism in Freemasonry is revealed only to the 'highest' initiates, then one must wonder what the whole point is. Since the highest initiates must, by definition, be few, what Satanic mission could they be accomplishing? Certainly, it would be contrary to the will of Satan for these leaders to encourage morality rather than immorality, charity rather than hedonism, and church attendance rather than its abandonment. A system which hides itself by teaching and ecouraging the opposite of what it actually believes can hardly be called successful. All of this, of course, points to the absurdity of the accusation." (Pillars of Wisdom, pages 242-243)

S. Brent Morris, "Have you heard the sad story about the dog that someone tried to dry off in a microwave oven? What about the one where a jealous husband poured concrete into a new convertible, not realizing it was a surprise anniversary gift from his wife? Or maybe you've read about Albert Pike's so-called "Luciferian Doctrine," which teaches Masons that Lucifer is God?
These stories have one thing in common: they're all false. The first two are harmless "urban myths," innocently retold as cautionary tales. The story about Albert Pike and Lucifer, however, is a lie that will not die. Gabriel Antoine Jogand-Pages (writing as Leo Taxil) conceived the hoax and designed it to slander Freemasonry and to embarrass the Catholic Church. It has been repeated for a century by anti-Masons who accept with childlike eagerness any slur against our gentle craft.
No other lie has captured the imagination of anti-Masons quite like this Leo Taxil hoax (just one of many he perpetrated against Freemasonry and the Catholic Church). Once our critics have twisted logic to convince themselves that Freemasonry is the work of Satan, they are ready to accept this perversion. It usually comes in the form of a quotation that starts, "On July 14, 1889, Albert Pike, Sovereign Pontiff of Universal Freemasonry, addressed to the 23 Supreme Confederated Councils of the world the following Instructions..." That's all you need to read to know the author has fallen prey to this infamous hoax.
It's not entirely certain when the quote was fabricated nor where it was first published. We can, however, trace its modern appearances to Edith Starr Miller who wrote Occult Theocrasy in 1933 under the pen name "Lady Queenborough." Her work is excerpted and treated as the gospel truth, usually without attribution. Such practices are known as plagiarism in other disciplines, but neither serious research nor intellectual integrity stand in the way of the headlong rush to slander Freemasonry.
Ms. Miller found her quote in the 1894 book by Abbe Clarin de la Rive, La Femtne et L'Enfant dans la Franc-Maconnerie Universelie (Woman and Child in Universal Freemasonry). Abbe de la Rive, like Ms. Miller, was duped by the hoax; they are guilty only of incompetent research and an eager willingness to believe the worst about Freemasonry. The ultimate source was the pornographer, anti-Mason, and anti-Catholic Leo Taxil (Gabriel Antoine Jogand-Pages). Taxil publicly confessed his deception in 1897; his story is widely available for anyone willing to look for the truth. Just a few of the many references are listed below.
. R. Limouzin-Lamothe. The New Catho-
lic Encyclopedia, s.v. Taxil, Leo.
. Henry W. Coil. et al., Coil's Masonic
Encyclopedia (Richmond, Va.: Macoy
Publishing & Masonic Supply Co., 1961 ),
s.v. Taxil, Leo.
. Great Soviet Encyclopedia. 3rd ed., s.v.
Taxil, Leo.
. Arthur E. Waite, A New Encyclopedia of
Freemasonry, new & rev. ed. (New York:
Weathervane Books, 1970), s.v. Palladian
Freemasonry.
. Alec Mellor, "A Hoaxer of Genius--Leo
Taxil." Our Separated Brethren, the Free-
masons, translated by A.W. Barnett and
C.N. Batham (Richmond, Va., Macoy
Publishing & Masonic Supply Co., 1964),
pp. 149-155.
The entire passage from Ms. Miller is not worth quoting, though we will give the portion most repeated.
The Bogus "Luciferian Doctrine" of Albert Pike from Edith Starr Miller (Lady Queenborough) Occult Theocrasy. 2 vols, 1933. Reprint. Hawthorne, Calif.: The Christian Book Club of America, 1980.
"(p. 233) In La Femme et l'Enfant dans la Franc -Maconnierie Universelle page 578, A.C. De La Rive states that on July 14, 1889, Albert Pike, Sovereign Pontiff of Universal Freemasonry, addressed to the 23 Supreme Confederated Councils of the world the following instructions, which we quote herewith in part. (p. 220) That which we must say to the crowd is;--We worship a God, but it is the God that one adores without superstition.
To you, Sovereign Grand Inspectors General, we say this, that you may repeat it to the Brethren of the 32nd, 31st and 30th degrees-The Masonic religion should be, by all of its initiates of the high degrees, maintained in the purity of the Luciferian doctrine. If Lucifer were not God, would Adonay (The God of the Christians) whose deeds prove his cruelty, perfidy, and hatred of man, barbarism and repulsion for science, would Adonay and his priests calumniate him?
Thus, the doctrine of Satanism is a heresy; and the true and pure philosophic religion is the belief in Lucifer the equal of Adonay: but Lucifer, God of Light and God of Good, is struggling for humanity against Adonay, the God of Darkness and Evil."
There are several problems with this quotation, some obvious and some subtle. To start with, about 1,000,000 out of 2,500,000 American Masons have the 32 in the Scottish Rite, including ministers, rabbis, bishops, and other devout worshippcrs of God. It is inconceivable that there would not be mass resignations if these men were taught this disgusting "Luciferian doctrine." Is it believable that the millions of Scottish Rite Masons during the last two centuries could be cowed into such total silence?
The quote is fiddled with logical inconsistencies. There is no position of "Sovereign Pontiff of Universal Freemasonry." There is no "Confederation of Supreme Councils." In the United States virtually all Scottish Rite Masons receive the 32, so why would Albert Pike suggest special treatment for 30, 31, and 32nd Masons, when that would have included everyone?
The real evidence of a hoax comes in De La Rive's footnote. which neither Ms. Miller nor anyone else bothers to quote. It refers to Diana Vaughan, the matchless creation of Leo Taxil's twisted mind. The footnote (and a translation) are printed below.
"Ce fur la Soeur Diana Vaughan a'Albert
Pike.--afin de lui donner la plus grande
marque de confiance,--chargea d' apporter son encyclique luciferiene, a Paris, pendante l' Exposition Universelle.
Abbe Clarin de la Rive, La Fernroe et
L'Enfant dans la Franc-Maconnerie
Universelle. Paris: Delhomme & Briquet,
Editeurs, 1894, p. 589.
It was the Sister Diana Vaughan that Albert Pike,--in order to give her the greatest mark of confidence, charged to carry his lucifeijan encyclical, to Paris, during the
Universal Exposition."
The Diana Vaughan hoax is well known and has been explained time and time again for nearly a century. Here's what the New Catholic Encyclopedia (R. Limouzin-Lamothe, s.v. Taxil, Leo) says about Leo Taxil.
Taxil purported to reveal the existence of
"Palladium," the most secret Masonic or-
der, which practiced devil-worship. He re-
counted the story of its high priestess Diana Vaughan; and ended by publishing the Memoires d'une ex-Palladiste after her conversion to Catholicism. When doubts began to spread, Taxil realized the time had come to end the deceit. In a conference in Paris (April 19, 1897), he cynically admitted his hoax, whose aim, he said, was to hold up Catholicism to derision.
After Taxil's public confession, Abbe de la Rive expressed his disgust and recanted his writings on Diana Vaughan in the April 1897 issue of Freemasonry Disclosed, a magazine devoted to the destruction of the Craft. As much as he hated Freemasonry, de la Rive had the integrity to admit Taxil's hoax.
With frightening cynicism the miserable
person we shall not name here (Taxil) de-
clared before an assembly especially con-
vened for him that for twelve years he had
prepared and carried out to the end the most extraordinary and most sacrilegious of hoaxes. We have always been careful to publish special articles concerning Palladism and Diana Vaughan. We are now giving in this issue a complete list of these articles. which can now be considered as not having existed.
Quoted in Alec Mellor, Strange Masonic
Stories (Richmond. Va.: Macoy Publishing
& Masonic Supply Co., Inc., 1982), p. 151.
Anyone interested in the plain truth can easily discover the story of Leo Taxil. Recent critics of Masonry, however, are not interested in simple facts. These detractors have convinced themselves that Freemasonry is the work of the devil. Thus they apparently justify their perversions with the thought that they are doing the Lord's work--saving an unsuspecting world from Satan. No misquotation, no distortion, no lie is too great if it accomplishes what they perceive as their holy mission. This includes gleefully perpetuating the bogus "Luciferian Doctrine" of Albert Pike. All this is done in the name of Him who said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life."
Freemasonry teaches its members tolerance, even of its assailants. If you are presented with the story of Pike and Lucifer, quietly but firmly state, "It's a lie." Don't let it pass without comment, but don't provoke an argument. The truth is on our side.
But remember the words attributed to Edmund Burke: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." (Albert Pike And Lucifer: The Lie That Will Not Die, The Short Talk Bulletin, The Masonic Service Association  of the United States, June 1993)

The personification or attributes of Lucifer do not have any role in the beliefs or rituals of Freemasonry.


Who Is Lucifer?
A Scripture quoted by the Carricos is Isaiah 14:12-15. But, does Isaiah 14:12-15 refer to Satan?

Isaiah 14 is a prophecy about the fall of the king of Babylon, not Satan. This passage of Scripture contains no mention of Satan by name or reference. by reading Isaiah 14:12-17 within its context, we find that Lucifer is not an Old Testament name for the devil or Satan. The passage in Isaiah 14:12 is directed at the downfall of the arrogant babylonian rulers who took Israel into exile. The context of Isaiah 14 does not portray Satan as Lucifer. Keil and Delitzsch, in their commentary, proclaim that "Lucifer," as a synonym, "is perfectly appropriate one for the king of Babel." They concluded, "Lucifer, as a name given to the devil, was derived from the passage . . . without any warrant whatever, as relating to the apostasy and punishment of the angelic leaders." There is no reference in the Bible that states that Lucifer is name of Satan.

F. H. Woods writes in "A Dictionary of the Bible," vol. III, page 159, "Lucifer, shining one, i.e. the morning star, as explained by the following words 'son of dawn,' Isaiah 14:12. - The word is applied by the writer of the prophecy to the King of Babylon, partly in reference to the astrology for which Chaldaea was famous in ancient times, partly to the prevailing belief in the deification of heroes. The king of Babylon had complacently looked forward to the time when he would ascend into heaven and exalt his throne above the stars of God. But in reality his dead body would be treated with the utmost contempt, 'a carcass trodden under foot,' while his soul would descend into Sheol, and there receive but an empty honour from the shades, astounded that the great and mighty king could become like one of themselves."

It is easy to see how the Carricos have a twisted view of Freemasonry when they twist Scripture to meet their views.


October 1, 2007