261 religious encyclopedia exile of the Israelites Extreme Unction



Download 6.59 Mb.
Page34/65
Date08.11.2016
Size6.59 Mb.
1   ...   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   ...   65

Freemasons

Free Spirit THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 380




at will, as distinguished from their fellow workmen in the gilds. The latter were restricted to certain localities and confined to their gilds, while the former went from land to land, and formed a wide­spread organization under the supervision of the supreme lodge at Strasburg. The institution of the lodge lasted longest in England, receiving a new impetus through the burning of London in 1666. Far different, however, is " symbolic freemasonry," which is a secret organization for the erection of a spiritual temple of humanity in the heart of man. The change from the ancient masonic craft to modern freemasonry began as early as the end of the sixteenth century. After the rebuilding of London and the completion of St. Paul's, the ma­jority of lodges disappeared, but the four which survived formed a grand lodge at London on St. John's Day (June 24), 1717, surrendering manual masonry, and seeking a new sphere in moral and social life. The original organization of medieval masonic fraternity was retained, however, espe­cially the distinction of masters, journeymen, and apprentices, as well as mutual help, the applica­tion of a detailed symbolism in words, pictures, and signs, and the solemn obligation to secrecy covering everything pertaining to the lodge. In 1721, one of the founders of this union, James An­derson, an English Presbyterian minister, drafted a " constitution " for this cosmopolitan organiza­tion, which bound all " freemasons " to a faithful observance of the moral law, humanity, and patri­otism. In religion,, however, they are non‑secta­rian, and profess only that faith in which all men of honor agree. Doctrines going beyond that are tolerated as private opinions, but no one is per­mitted to make propaganda for them. The char­acteristics of masonry are, therefore, humanistic morals, the cultivation of fraternity, and a deistic belief. It was the outcome of English deism and latitudinarianism, and was soon adopted in Ger­many in radical religious circles. In those Roman Catholic countries where no Protestantism ex­isted, masonry even obtained the importance of an opposing church, and freemasonry is accordingly regarded as in league with Satan. 3n the en­cyclical humanum genus on freemasonry, dated Apr. 20, 1884 (2d ed., Treves, 1885), Leo XIII. solemnly condemned it, as other popes had re­peatedly done since 1751. '

From England masonry soon spread to the Brit­ish colonies acid to the continent of Europe. In 1725 it was in Paris; in 1733 in Florence and Bos­ton; and in 1737 in Hamburg. In 1738 the Prus­sian crown‑prince, afterward Frederick the Great, was solemnly initiated at Brunswick by a deputa­tion from the Hamburg lodge Absalom. As king he energetically labored for the spread of the sys­tem, and in 1744 was made grand master of the grand lodge " Zu den drei Weltkugeln" in Berlin. As the tendency of masonry is essentially subjec­tive, many internal dissensions arose. In addition to the Brotherhood of St. John, divisions were formed with a knightly organization and the most varied degrees of fantastic terminology and mysterious ceremonial. Rationalism in Germany helped to introduce masonry among the middle




classes, where it still has a strong hold on account 'of the advantages, especially in social respects, enjoyed by many of its adherents, such as physi­cians and merchants. Spiritually it has not ad­vanced. For Evangelical churches with their charitable interests, freemasonry is wholly super­fluous. The Roman Catholic Church is opposed to the freemasons.

In Europe the number of masons is estimated to be over 300,000, most of them belonging to the grand lodges of Great Britain. In America, in ad­dition to freemasons proper, who number about 750,000, there are similar societies with about 4,650; 000 members, divided into Odd Fellows (820,000), Knights . of Pythias (475,000), Ancient Order of United Workmen (361,000), Maccabees (244,000), Modern Workmen of America (204,000), and about twenty smaller orders, this entire body spending annually about $25,000,000 for benefit money.

PAUL TaCHAC$ERT.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Lists of books are furnished by G. Klass, Biblioaek der Fieimaurerei, Frankfort (1846), Supple­ment by G. Findel, Leipsic, 1866, and W. Gowans, Catalogue of Books on Freemasonry, New York, 1858. Con­sult, A. G. Mackey, Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, Phila­delphia, n.d.; idem, Hist. of Freemasonry, 3 parts, New York, 1900; J. O. Halliwell, Early Haul, of Freemasonry an England, London, 1843; C. L. Paton, Freemasonry, its Symbolism, Religious Nature, etc., ib. 1873; L. Hyne­man, Hist. of Freemasonry in England, New York, 1878; R. F. Gould, Hist. of Freemasonry, 6 vole., London, 1884­1887; H. Boos, Gtachichte der Freimaurerei, Aarau, 1894; F. Katch, Entatehung and . . Endzuxck der Preimaurerei. Berlin, 1897; J. 6assenbaeh, Die Freamaurerei, ib. 1897; 0. Kuntsemijller, Die Preimaurerei and ihre Gepner, Hanover, 1897; A. Churchward, Origin and Antiquity of Freemasonry, London, 1898.


FREE METHODISTS. See METHODISTS, IV., 5.
FREE RELIGIOUS ASSOCIATION: An asso­ciation established in Boston May 30, 1867, aiming at the emancipation of religion from sectarian limitations, the reconciliation of faiths, and the ap= plication of scientific methods to the study of relig­ion, and emphasizing practical morality. Octa­vius Brooks Frothingham was the first president, and for many years Ralph Waldo Emerson was one of the vice‑presidents. Members axe allowed the utmost liberty of opinion. The elastic nature of the organization‑" any person desiring to co­operate" is "considered a member"‑renders exact statistics impossible. The association has not attempted to , organize local societies, but has contented itself with holding conventions and distributing publications. An annual report is usually issued in pamphlet form.

EDWIN D. MEAD.


FREE SPIRIT, BRETHREN OF THE.

Meaning and Origin (¢ 1). Mystic Pantheism Wide‑spread (§ 2). Various Groups (§ 3).

Brethren of the Free Spirit is a name under which the heresiologists of the Middle Ages classed,.vari­ous extreme developments of quietistic and pan­theistic mysticism. Modern scholars also have ac­cepted the existence of a pantheistic sect, sharply marked off from the fellowship of the Church, usually recruited from the laity, and handing down






381 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA Pr°emm°°n°

Free Spirit




its doctrines practically unaltered from the thir­

teenth to the sixteenth century. It is possible to

show, however, that the phenomena classed under

this title have points of such radical difference

as to destroy the conception of one single pan­

theistic tradition reproducing itself

i. Meaning through more than one century by

and means of an actual sect; and that the

Origin. origin of this pantheistic quietistic mys­

ticism is found not among the ordi­

nary laity but in the monasteries and among the

Beghards and Beguines, who came so strongly

under monastic influence; also that in the follow­

ing centuries the boundaries between monastic

mysticism and sectarian pantheism were never

very stable. There is no adequate ground for be­

lieving that the teachings of Amalric of Bena (q.v.)

found acceptance among a section of the French

Waldenses, and then about 1215 spread from east­

ern France into western and southern Germany.

The earliest authentic information about the ap­

pearance of this sort of mysticism on German soil

shows certain Swabian heretics about 1250 teach­

ing a radical pantheism and determinism. Start­

ing from the belief in the divine essence of the soul

and of all earthly things, they considered the as­

cension of the soul to God the goal of all religion.

This was to be attained by abstraction from all

earthly activity and also from moral and religious

commandments which distracted the soul from its

purpose of union with the Godhead. The " per­

fect man " who has reached this goal is sinless;

his will is God's will; the Church's laws and means

of grace are without significance for him. All

value was taken both from moral effort and from

ecclesiastical ordinances by the belief that every

human act had been predestined from eternity.

All this points to these doctrines being'a straggling

offshoot of the monastic mysticism of the school of

Saint‑Victor, as drawn by its adherents from Dio­

nysius the Areopagite. When Richard of Saint­

Victor (q.v.) says of the soul united with God (De



prepar. dnimi ad contempl., ii. 13) " Here first the

soul recovers its* ancient dignity, and asserts its

claim to the innate glory of its own freedom,"

he uses expressions only too easily misunder­

stood by extravagant mystics, and serving them

as a foundation for their doctrine of spiritual

freedom.

The decrees of the Council of Vienne (1311)



against the Beguines and Beghards shows that the

church authorities of that time were disposed to

tax these communities throughout Germany with

similar pantheistic heresies. The consequences of

this view have been that up to the present day it

has been usual to attribute a. much wider exten­

sion than the facts justify to the pan­

s. Mystic theistic doctrines, and. to consider the

Pantheism characteristics of the orthodox Beg­

Wide‑spread. uines and . Beghards, e.g., their es­

teem for poverty and mendicancy, as

distinguishing the heretical mystics. The fact is,

however, that it is (difficult to draw a sharp line of

demarcation between orthodox and heretical mys­

ticism. How true this is. may be seen not only

from the complaint of David of Augsburg that the




friends of mysticism were persecuted on no other ground than as heretics or as possessed by demons, but also from the accusations of spreading alleged her­esies which were brought against Tauler, Suso, and Ruysbroeck, to say nothing of Eckhart. Among the cloistered women of the thirteenth and four­teenth centuries the line of demarcation was even more fluctuating. The ecstatic‑mystical life and the visionary condition of many of them produces frequent expressions from which to pantheism is but a short step. It can scarcely be denied that this pantheism won many adherents through the influence of the great German mystics of the four­teenth century. The theory that close personal relations existed between Eckhart and the " Free Spirit " heretics at Strasburg and Cologne is un­proved and unlikely; but the sectarian pantheistic mysticism was unquestionably aided and influ­enced by his speculations. In a well known pas­sage of Suso's Biichlein der Wahrheit (ch. vi.), in which he is arguing with the leaders of the pan­theistic mystics, the latter quote Eckhart as a high authority. This attempt to show him as on their side, however unjustifiable, throws light on the close correspondence between the propositions con­demned as his by John XXII. in 1329 and the ex­tracts given by Mosheim from a lost sectarian book De novem rupt7bua; apparently the papal censure was based not upon Eckhart's authentic writings but upon this pantheistic treatise which was given out as his.

The opponents of the teaching of the " Free Spirit," e. g. Tauler, Rulman Merawin, Gerson, Ruysbroeck, and Geert Groote, give the impres‑

sion that they are combating, not an

3. Various organized sect, but a morbid tendency

Groups. and an exaggeration of mystical piety.

The confusion frequently found in

writers of that period between the adherents of this

pantheistic mysticism and the Fraticelli and Apos­

tolic Brethren springs partly from ignorance of the

points in which they differed widely, and partly

from the use of the expression " sects spiritus

libertatis " as a common designation for quite dis­

tinct heresies. This has led some modern writers

into the supposition that the teachings of the Ger­

man heretical mystics had been spread in the four­

teenth century among the Italian Fraticelli and

Apostolicals, as well as through the so‑called " Tur­

lupins " (q.v.), in France. It is clear that the at­

tempt to trace the development and organization

of a single definite pantheistic sect in the Middle

Ages must be unsuccessful. The records of the

tribunals, however, make us acquainted with vari­

ous groups of this kind and with a whole series of

individual representatives of heretical mysticism.

The condemnation of Margareta Porete, a Beguine

of Hainault, who was executed in Paris in 1318,

precedes the Council of Vienne. In her writings

the soul, " annihilated " in God, is released from

the obligation to practise virtue, which, however,

comes naturally to the soul united with God.

Probably similar to hers was the teaching of the

mystical work of Marie de Valenciennes, contro­

verted by Gerson, which, appealing to an alleged

Biblical counsel " Ama et fac quod vis," denied




Freethinker__French_Revolution_THE_NEW_SCHAFF‑HERZOG'>Freethinker



French Revolution THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 382


the binding force of the moral law for those who were filled with the mystical love of God. With the Flemish poetess and visionary Hadewich Blom­maerdine (q.v.), the pantheistic element is not prominent. About the same time in Cologne, a Netherlander, Walther, burned c. 1322, was the center of a wide‑spread pantheistic movement, in the contemporary descriptions of which we meet for the first time with the nocturnal Adamite orgies (see ADAMITEs). In southern Germany Berthold of Rorbach (q.v.), burned 1356 at Speyer, and Hermann Kachener of Nuremberg, who recanted at Wilrzburg in 1342, were the apostles of a similar movement. Another interest­ing group is that of the "Friends of God" (q.v.), whose leader, Nicholas of Basel was burned at Vienna in 1396. Pantheistic‑antinomian ele­ments are mingled with apocalyptic views of the Joachim type in the " Homines intelligentim " (q.v.). The sources for the history of these her­esies in the fifteenth century are so confused that little can be made of them. That pantheistic ideas still had power in the Reformation period is shown by the rise of the Loist sect at Antwerp (1525­1545), and the Libertine or Spiritual party (see LIBERTINES, 3) which after 1529 spread from the Netherlands through France, western Germany, and Switzerland, as well as by certain develop­ments of the Anabaptist movement.

(HERMAN HAUPT.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sources are: P. Fredericq, Corpus docu­mentorum inquisitionis Neerlandicle, vole. i.‑ii., Ghent, 1889‑96; Ulanoweki, in Scriptures rerum Polonicarum, xiii. 233‑250, Cracow, 1889. Consult: H. C. Lea, Hist. of Inquisition, vol. ii., passim, New York, 1888; C. U. Hahn, Geschichte der Ketzer, ii. 470, Stuttgart, 1847; J. C. L. Gieseler, Kirchengeachichte, II. ii. 642 sqq., Bonn, 1849, Eng. transl., ed. H. B. Smith, ii. 590 sqq., New York, 1871; W. Moll, Kerkgeschiedenis van Neder­land, II., iii. 59 sqq., Utrecht, 1869; W. Preger, Geschichte der deutsehen Mystik, vole. i.‑iii., Leipsic, 1874‑93; H. Haupt, ZKG, v. 478, vii. 503, xii. 35; H. Reuter, Geschichte der religidsen AufklBrunp, ii. 240 sqq., Berlin, 1877; W. Wattenbaeh, in Sibunpsberichte der Berliner Akademie, 1887, pp. 517 eqq.; J. J. I. von D811inger, Sektengeschichte, ii. 378 sqq., 702 sqq., Munich, 1890; Neander, Christian Church, iv. 633, v. 393, 401, 408.

FREETHINKER: In general, one who reaches his conclusions by following the demands of rea­son, rather than those of authority; more particu­larly, one who rejects the supernatural elements of Christianity. The term was first used toward the close of the seventeenth century, though it does not seem to'have gained general currency till after the publication of Anthony Collins' Dis­course of Freethinking (1713, see COLLINS, AN­TRoNY). The term then came to be applied spe­cifically to the group of deistic writers formed by Collins, Woolston, Tindal, and others (see DEISM). Although Collins defined freethinking as merely an attempt to judge a proposition according to the weight of evidence, his book was regarded as an attack on the fundamental tenets of Christianity; and from that day to this the term freethinker has carried with it, in the popular understanding, the implication of skeptic, infidel, and even libertine and atheist. The freethinker of to‑day does not reject Christianity; he explains it.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Consult the literature under ANTrraINI­TARIANISM; DEISM.


FREE‑WILL BAPTISTS. See BAPTISTS, IL, 4, c.


FREISING, BISHOPRIC OF: A bishopric or­

ganized by Boniface in the spring of 739 after his

return from Rome, with the other Bavarian bish­

oprics, under the approval of Duke Odilo. It was

of small extent; the boundary joined Augsburg on

thp west, ran to the south along the ridge of the

hills on the north side of the Inn valley, then along

the top of the Mangfall range, and touched the

river at the present Kufstein, following its course

to Gars, where it turned to the north and came

round to meet the Augsburg line again above

Geisenfeld. In charge of it Boniface placed Erim­

bert, brother of Corbinian (q.v.). The number of

monasteries it contained was large. The most im­

portant of them was that of St. Quirinus on the

Tegernsee,'which goes back probably to the reign

of King Pepin, and asserted its immediate depend­

ence on the Empire until the time of Louis the

Bavarian. (A. HAUCg.)

The history of the diocese presents few features of more than local interest up to the Reformation, in which period it must be said that the preserva­tion of Bavaria to the Roman Catholic faith is due rather to the zeal of the dukes than to the influ­ence of the bishops. Both, however, were not un­willing to show a reasonable spirit, and the Synod of Salzburg in 1562, including Bishop Maurice von Sandizell of Freising (1559‑66), assented to the laying before the Council of Trent of the conces­sions desired by Duke Albert V. of Bavaria and the Emperor Ferdinand‑the marriage of the clergy and communion in both kinds. The next bishop, Ernest (1566‑1612), was himself of the ducal fam­ily, which gave the see two more bishops, Albert Sigmund (165285) and John Theodore (1727‑63). The title of prince‑bishop was conferred by Ferdi­nand 11. upon the incumbents of the see. By the secularization of 1802‑03 Freising was incorpo­rated as a principality with the Bavarian Palati­nate, except the portions situated in Austria and the Tyrol, which were given to Salzburg. By the con­cordat of 1817 a combined archbishopric of Munich and Freising took the place of the old bishopric (see CONCORDATS AND DELIMITING BULLS, VI., 2, § 2).

BIBLIOGRAPHY: C. Meichelbeck, Hist. Frisinpeneia, 2 vole., Augsburg, 1724‑29; Graf Hundt, in AMA, vole. xii.­xiii.; K. Roth, Kozrohe Renner, Munich, 1854; idem, Verzeichnis der Freiainger Urkunden, ib. 1855; idem, Oertlichkeiten des Bisthums Freising, ib. 1856; S. Riezler, Geschichte Bayerns, Gotha, 1880; H. G. Gengier, Beid~w,6pe zur Rechtsgesehichte Bayerns, i. 58, 185 sqq., Leipaie, 1889; Rettberg, KD, i7. 257; Hauck, KD, i. 491.
FRELINGHUYSEN, fri'ling‑hai"zen, THEODORE: Dutch Reformed educator; b. at Millstone, N. J., Mar. 28, 1787; d. at New Brunswick, N. J., Apr. 12, 1862. After his graduation (1804) from the College of New Jersey (Princeton) he studied law and was admitted to the bar in 1808, when he removed to Newark. He was attorney‑general of New Jersey 1817‑29, United States senator 1829‑45, mayor of Newark 1837‑38, chancellor of New York University 1839‑50, and president of Rutgers College 1850‑62. In 1844 he was the Whig candidate for the vice‑presidency, on the ticket with Henry Clay. In the senate he won for



383 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA Freethinker



French Revolution


himself the title of " Christian statesman." It is

said that no other American layman was ever as­

sociated with so many great religious and char­

itable enterprises. He was president of the Ameri­

can Bible Society 1846‑62, of the American Tract

Society 1842‑48, and for sixteen years president of

the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign

Missions. He was vice‑president of the American

Sunday‑school Union 1826‑61, and for many years

was vice‑president of the American Colonization

Society.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: T. W. Chambers, Memoir of Theodore Fre­

linphuysen, New York, 1883.

FREMANTLE,WILLIAX HENRY: Dean of Ripon;

b. at Swanbourne (17 m. n.e. of Oxford), Bucking­

hamshire, Dec. 12, 1831. He studied at Balliol Col­

lege, Oxford (B.A., 1853), and was ordered deacon

in 1855 and ordained priest in 1856. He was fel­

low of All Souls, Oxford, 1854‑63 and fellow of

Balliol and tutor 1883‑94. He was curate of

Middle Claydon, 1855‑57, vicar of Lewknor, Ox­

fordshire, 1857‑65, rector of St. Mary's, Bryan­

ston Square, London, 1865‑‑83, and canon of Can­

terbury 1882‑95. Since 1895 he has been dean of

Ripon. He was chaplain to Bishop and Archbishop

Tait 1861‑82, select preacher to the University of

Oxford in 1879‑80, Bampton Lecturer in 1883. and

William Belden Noble Lecturer at Harvard Uni­

versity in 1900. He has written The Influence of

Commerce on Christianity (London, 1854); Lay

Power in Parishes (1869); The Ecclesiastical Judg­

ments of the Privy Council (in collaboration with

G. C. Brodriek; 1865); Reconciliation to God



through Jesus Christ (1870); The Gospel of the Secu­

lar Life (university sermons; 1882); The World as

the Subject of Redemption (Bampton Lectures;

1885); Eighty‑Eights: Sermons on Armada arid



Revolution (1888); The Present Work of the An­

glican Communion (1888); and Christian Ordi­

nances and Social Progress (Noble lectures for 1900;

Boston, 1901). He also translated the works of St.

Jerome and Rufinus in the Nicene and Post‑Nicene

Fathers (in collaboration with G. Lewis and W. G.

Martley; Edinburgh, 1893), and edited Church Re­



form (London, 1888) and the Sermons of B. Jowett

(3 vole., 1895‑1901).




FRENCH CONFESSION OF FAITH. See GAL1.I­

CAN CONFESSION.

FRENCH PROPHETS: A fanatical sect is Eng­

land started in 1706 by refugee Camisards (q.v.),

who pretended to have the gift of prophecy and

the power of working miracles. Their special mis­

sion, they claimed, was to declare the speedy es­

tablishment of the Messiah's kingdom, which was

to be accompanied by wonders and the infliction

of severe judgments on the wicked. For a time

they produced a deep impression in London and

the larger provincial cities and won the allegiance

of such well‑known people as Lady Jane Forbes,

Sir Richard Bulkeley, and John Lacy. Bulkeley

claimed to have been miraculously cured of con­

tinuous headache, stone, and rupture, and con­

tributed large sums to the support of the sect, at

the time of his death (1710) he was on the point of




selling his estates and distributing the proceeds among the prophets. He wrote in their defense, An Answer to Several Treatises Lately Published on the Subject of the Prophets (London, 1708).

Lacy, who was a member of Edmund Calamy's

church, fell under the influence of the prophets

soon after their arrival and " entered into all their

absurdities, except that of a community of goods,

to which he strongly objected, having an income

of two thousand pounds per annum." He became

a seer and healer and published several works for

the cause, including A Cry from the Desert, or Tes­

timonials of Miraculous Things Lately Come to Pass

in the Cevennes (London, 1707), a translation

from the French of Francis Maximilian; Prophetical



Warnings of Elias Marion (1707); The Prophetical

Warnings of John Lacy (1707), a collection of his

own prophecies; A Relation o f the Dealings o f God



to his Unworthy Servant, John Lacy (1708), an an­

swer to an attack by Edmund Calamy; and A



Vision of J. L., Esq., a Prophet (1715), inspired by

the Jacobite rising. In 1707 the prophets were

convicted of publishing false and scandalous pam­

phlets and holding tumultuous assemblies and

placed in the pillory, though prosecutions' against

Lacy and Bulkeley were quashed. This seems to

have made the sect temporarily more popular than

ever, and soon there were no less than 400 persons

spreading their fanatical prophecies in various

parts of the country. They even went so far as to

predict that one of their number, Thomas Emes,

lately deceased, would rise from the dead on May



25, 1708. In a pamphlet entitled The Mighty

Miracle, or the Wonder of Wonders, Lacy issued a

general invitation to everybody to come to Bun­

hill Fields to witness this event. The failure of

Emes to emerge from his grave at the time ap­

pointed weakened the influence of the prophets,

and from that time they fell into disgrace.




Download 6.59 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   ...   65




The database is protected by copyright ©sckool.org 2020
send message

    Main page