David G. Hackett,That Religion in Which all Men Agree: Freemasonry in American Culture

Reviewed by Bryan S Turner, City University of New York, USA

This masterly study of Freemasonry in American and British history from the 1730s to the 1920s has both an explicit and an implicit dimension. David Hackett skillfully traces the changing fortunes and character of Freemasonry from its Enlightenment foundations onwards. Although Freemasonry is often associated with secular Enlightenment rationalism, he shows how it sat comfortably inside religious traditions in American history. It is thus overtly an account of how Freemason lodges were deeply embedded in Protestantism, Roman Catholicism, and Judaism. With its universalistic and inclusive worldview, Masonry was indeed “that religion on which all men (and eventually women) agreed.” Perhaps the less obvious and implicit side of this historical narrative is a sociology of civil society. This volume is a contribution, in line with the work of Jürgen Habermas, to the study of the public sphere—that is, “the realm of social life where citizens set aside coercive external religious and state authority and individual status distinctions to create collective opinion through rational communication” (p.7). However, whereas Habermas assumed that the rational and critical culture of bourgeois civil society was ultimately incompatible with religion, Hackett argues that in the American colony, where English monarchy and parliament were an ocean away, civil society associations were local and decentralized, and more importantly critical debate about social and political matters was neither separate nor distinct from radical Protestantism. Unsurprisingly, Hackett’s primary thesis is drawn from Alexis de Tocqueville rather than from Habermas. Intermediary associations sitting between the state and the people helped to stabilize the emerging American republic, and Freemasonry “was one of these organizations, which emerged from the eighteenth-century polite societies that transformed following the revolution into institutions that played a significant role in shaping public opinion” (p.56). Indeed many figures in the movement for American independence were attracted to Masonry, because its open and inclusive message promised to weld together communities that were otherwise divided by history, culture, ethnicity, and religion.

Freemason lodges were among the many “polite societies” that arose in English and American cities between the 1690s and the 1760s. We can understand these developments as a response to the growing impersonal and often anomic character of city life in which the lodges provided a means for re-creating the intimate social bonds of traditional village life. Gentlemen and artisans were able to mingle in the warm atmosphere of taverns, where members could combine discussion and merriment. These convivial spaces offered a respite from the competitive and individualistic society that was rapidly emerging with the capitalist economy. The Freemason fraternity was composed of the “middling ranks of men” who, as a new commercial elite, sought to separate themselves from the lower orders by their initiation into the culture of the lodges. The first Freemason lodge was established in Philadelphia in 1733, and in the colonial coastal cities Masonry grew as a system of private clubs—the Beefsteak Society, the Calves Head Club, and other eating fraternities—among the British immigrant communities. For example, the colonial Masonic practice of processing into an Anglican church and listening to a sermon dedicated to the occasion indicates the significant overlap between the worldviews of Masonry and Anglicanism.

If Freemasonry offered an escape from the harsh reality of freewheeling commercialism, it also provided a rich symbolic and ritual world to weld men together. Hackett suggests plausibly that the ritual practices of Masonic lodges were in conformity with John Locke’s theory of knowledge in which what we know is not derived from eternal objective truths but rather from the impressions that strike us through experience. Knowledge is more created than discovered. Masonic rituals were intended to shape the minds and morals of men. Before its transformation from a guild of craft masons to a fraternity of gentlemen, Masonry had but modest rites, which were simply methods for the recognition of new members. This situation was changed by the publication of William Preston’s Illustrations of Masonry (1772), which was designed to teach moral lessons and to improve the members through lectures and ceremonies. Although they were convivial clubs for men, the lodges required members to behave respectfully, to wear decent clothing, and to refrain from coarse language, drunkenness, and indecent behavior. In short, they provided, to borrow from the historical sociology of Norbert Elias, an institutional setting for the civilizing process. Masonic culture promoted the Enlightenment ideals of sociability and benevolence, and as such it existed securely within the latitudinarian theology of the Anglican Church.

The elaboration of Masonic ritual illustrates an important tension within Freemasonry between its Enlightenment principles and its search for authentic primitive wisdom and attendant ceremonies. This “sentiment of restoration” involved a quest for the pristine purity of the “first times.” In this respect, Hackett notes how the Mormon religion of Joseph Smith borrowed from Masonic symbolism, and hence Mormon temples displayed the beehive and the All-Seeing Eye, and Temple garments displayed such artisanal icons as the compass and the square. Protestant primitivism also shared with Mormons and Masons the idea of an historical lapse in which human society had lost its way. This view of history could also take on a pessimistic millennial hue when in the late nineteenth century the evangelical aspiration to reform the world gave way to a less optimistic notion of restraining evil until the return of Jesus.

Freemasonry was remarkably successful in reaching out to diverse groups within American society. In Part Two, “Beyond the white Protestant middle class,” Hackett explores how Masonry was embraced by Black Americans, Native Americans, Jews, and Catholics. Many scholars from W.E.B. DuBois onwards have investigated the importance of voluntary, fraternal associations in American black culture. Hackett draws on the notion of “a black counterpublic” from Joanna Brooks (2003)’s American Lazarus to describe how the black church and the fraternal lodge provided a social and intellectual context in which African Americans could struggle against the legacy of slavery and racial subordination. Although Masonry was not essentially different from the many mutual benefit societies that provided welfare, economic aid, and social support, Masonry and Christianity emphasized discipline and respectability, both of which are important ingredients in social mobility and acceptance. Although Masonry did not offer salvation, it did inculcate values and practices that were designed to enhance and beautify secular living. Furthermore, the influence of primitivism in Masonry also allowed some lodges to claim that Africa was the historical origin of Freemasonry, which has spread originally from Egyptian and Ethiopian dynasties.

Similar developments followed the encounter between Masonry and Native Americans. The history of this encounter starts with the Mohawk leader Joseph Brant, who joined an English Masonic lodge in 1776. In his discussion of Native Americans, Hackett develops an intriguing view of the mutual benefits between white and native Masons. Firstly, “Indians appropriated Masonic beliefs and practices in an effort to preserve Native identity and confront the challenges of accommodation to American society with new spiritual resources” (p. 176). Both Christian and Masonic Native American leaders aimed at cultural and spiritual revitalization rather than simply conformity to white civilization. Thus, Christianity and Freemasonry led to a synthetic revitalization of what it meant to be a Cherokee or Mohawk. Lodge membership and Masonic views of brotherly love reinforced their traditional worldview while also giving them a social network that transcended tribal boundaries. Masonry also gave them access to political rights in the struggle to defend their land claims. Secondly, white Americans adopted native culture in an attempt to answer questions about authenticity and identity. For example, the members of the Boston Tea Party dressed up as Indians in order to identify with the indigenous traditions of North America. Thus, indigenous culture contributed to Masonic primitivism by giving Masonic ideology a grounding in the ancient past.

With the founding of B’nai B’rith and the Knights of Columbus, immigrant Jews and Catholics between 1723 and 1920 embraced Masonry to meet the need for assimilation into American society while retaining ties to the Old World. Nevertheless, tensions surfaced between the Enlightenment universalism of Masonry, the idea of Masonry as a Christian movement, and the acceptance of Jews in both European and American societies. On occasions, Jewish discomfort with the Christian strains within Masonry resulted in the creation of what were known as Jewish lodges. The creation of lodges in the New World was driven by Sephardic Jewish migration, and hence the foundation of both synagogues and lodges characterized the arrival of Jews into the Americas. Having faced persecution in Christendom for centuries, Masonic Jews welcomed the principles of religious freedom on which the American republic was founded and famously expressed in George Washington’s letter to the Jews of Newport Rhode Island in 1790, with the claim that the government of the United States was based on the principle: “To Bigotry, No Sanction, to Persecution, No Assistance.” By contrast, the relationship between Masonry and Catholicism was less harmonious. From Pope Clement XII’s 1738 encyclical In Eminenti to 1903, the Catholic Church had persistently threatened Catholic Freemasons with excommunication. Church leaders saw the secret oaths of the brotherhood as signs of conspiratorial politics that challenged church and state. The universalism of Masonry was a potent alternative to the universal Church. Whereas in Europe Masons suspected of heresy or treason were convicted and thrown into dungeons, in America Catholics moved relatively freely in colonial society. This situation changed in the nineteenth century between the 1820s and 1840s with the arrival of a million destitute, unskilled and poor Irish Catholics. The Catholic Church found itself increasingly at odds with the popular democratic values of American society, and Masonry struggled to sustain its universalism while attacking the papal bulls, which underlined its perception of Catholicism as authoritarian and hierarchical. The Knights of Columbus arose as a solution to these problems by celebrating the discovery of America as an event in Catholic history, promoting the ethnic pluralism of the Church, and identifying American Catholicism as a means of overcoming Old World antagonism to Masonry. Hackett concludes this section by claiming that for Jews and Catholics, “the beliefs and ritualized initiatory practices of Freemasonry provided a means of assimilation into American society while allowing for the retention of their respective ethnic and religious identities” (p.217).

In many respects one of the most intriguing features of Masonry is its relationship to women; questions about gender are taken up in chapter five. Despite its claims to universalism, “Freemasons shared with other American mainstream fraternal orders an identity based on the exclusion of women” (p.130). Masonry challenged the importance of family life by claiming that men could be made moral through its all-male brotherhoods. However, as the nineteenth century unfolded, American Protestantism became more closely identified with women’s concerns, and the authoritarian and stern God of Calvinism gave way to an emphasis on the gentle, caring, and loving Jesus. Women began to form a counterpublic to the dominant male public sphere and Masonic leaders began to welcome women to their lodges. The creation of the Order of the Eastern Star was an attempt to reconcile fraternalism and domesticity, and women came to play a large part in its activities. However, as women became more prominent in the public sphere, there was a backlash in the shape of Muscular Christianity, which was also part of the new emphasis on the “strenuous life” during the Progressive era. The very success of women in moving into the mainstream of organized religious life produced the Men and Religion Forward Movement, which aimed to bring young men back into church life.

This study of “Freemasonry in American Culture” offers a new perspective on the evolution of American society over more than two centuries. With its impeccable historical scholarship, the volume provides an important insight into the public sphere and an alternative to Habermas’s assumptions about the inherent secularity of public culture with the rise of bourgeois society. One criticism of Hackett’s historical account of the composition of civil society is that, apart from chapter four, which looks at anti-Masonry from 1826 to 1850, he does not give sufficient attention to the generic problem of secret societies in public spheres. For its critics, Masonic lodges were more secret than polite. Because Masonry has been so successful in penetrating the upper echelons of society in both England and America, there is an open question about how a democratic society can remain vibrant and transparent in relation to such fraternities. Are intermediary associations always functional in civil society?

Hackett is a professor of religious history and hence perhaps not professionally committed to the study of contemporary societies. Nevertheless, his Epilogue is somewhat disappointing. He observes that by concentrating on its internal affairs, modern Masons “rarely offer commentary on contemporary affairs” and that by 2000 “its aging, dwindling membership was apparent in its now ill-kept and largely vacant buildings” (p.225). Many readers will be curious to know why. Despite my sense of disappointment with the Epilogue to this fascinating historical study, Hackett also makes what may be an unintended contribution to the study of religion simply by raising in my mind the question, “In what sense was Freemasonry a religion?” This question is, of course, the perennial conundrum of all research into movements and institutions that either are or have family resemblance with what we designate as “religion.” Consequently, That Religion in Which all Men Agree not only makes an important contribution to American history, but it also pushes the intellectual boundaries of political theory with respect to “civil society” and the sociology of religion with respect to the debate about secularization.