I'm afraid even that conception is a misconception.
Make all the unsubstantiated claims you wish, what I said stands as a matter of record for anyone to read, Morals and Dogma, p. 106-7 and p. 818-19.
But a significant point to note about this particular accusation, is not what we find in
Morals and Dogma itself, but what antimason accusers do with it. And in that regard, the latter of these two references is a
classic. One of the seminal works criticizing Freemasonry was John Ankerberg’s
The Secret Teachings of the Masonic Lodge (1989). Here is the quote of Pike as it appears on p. 256 of that book:
The symbols of the wise always become the idols of the ignorant multitude. What the Chiefs of the Order really believed and taught, is indicated to the Adepts by the hints contained in the high Degrees of Free-Masonry, and by the symbols which only the Adepts understand.
The Blue Degrees are but the outer court or portico of the Temple. Part of the symbols are displayed there to the Initiate, but he is intentionally misled by false interpretations. It is not intended that he shall understand them; but it is intended that he shall imagine he understands them. Their true explication is reserved for the Adepts, the Princes of Masonry. The whole body of the Royal and Sacerdotal Art was hidden so carefully, centuries since, in the High Degrees, as that it is even yet impossible to solve many of the enigmas which they contain. It is well enough for the mass of those called Masons, to imagine that all is contained in the Blue Degrees; and whoso attempts to undeceive them will labor in vain, and without any true reward violate his obligations as an Adept.
Now take a look at this passage as it appears, in context, when the entire paragraph in which it appears gets included:
[It is absurd to suppose that men of intellect adored a monstrous idol called Baphomet, or recognized Mahomet as an inspired prophet. Their symbolism, invented ages before, to conceal what it was dangerous to avow, was of course misunderstood by those who were not adepts, and to their enemies seemed to be pantheistic. The calf of gold, made by Aaron for the Israelites, was but one of the oxen under the laver of bronze, and the Karobim on the Propitiatory, misunderstood. The symbols of the wise always become the idols of the ignorant multitude. What the Chiefs of the Order really believed and taught, is indicated to the Adepts by the hints contained in the high Degrees of Free-Masonry, and by the symbols which only the Adepts understand.
[The Blue Degrees are but the outer court or portico of the Temple. Part of the symbols are displayed there to the Initiate, but he is intentionally misled by false interpretations. It is not intended that he shall understand them; but it is intended that he shall imagine he understands them. Their true explication is reserved for the Adepts, the Princes of Masonry. The whole body of the Royal and Sacerdotal Art was hidden so carefully, centuries since, in the High Degrees, as that it is even yet impossible to solve many of the enigmas which they contain. It is well enough for the mass of those called Masons, to imagine that all is contained in the Blue Degrees; and whoso attempts to undeceive them will labor in vain, and without any true reward violate his obligations as an Adept. Masonry is the veritable Sphinx, buried to the head in the sands heaped round it by the ages.]
The significant part of the context is the introductory sentence:
It is absurd to suppose that men of intellect adored a monstrous idol called Baphomet, or recognized Mahomet as an inspired prophet.
In the first passage, with this key sentence omitted, it makes it
appear that when Pike speaks of “the symbols of the wise” always becoming “the idols of the ignorant multitude,” that he was referring to the adepts vs the initiates of Masonry.
But look again: Pike is addressing the idiotic accusations raised by “the ignorant multitude” who have tried to suggest Masonic “worship” of Baphomet!!
In other words, the accusers at whom Pike most certainly AIMED these remarks, have turned this on its head to try to make it a source of their further condemnation of Freemasonry. And they do so by deliberate omission of that which would refute their claim.
But as for anyone considering this “proof” that “Masonry conceals its secrets” from those of the (supposedly) “lower” degrees, Pike’s claims are their own refutation. Notice that he says:
The whole body of the Royal and Sacerdotal Art was hidden so carefully, centuries since, in the High Degrees, as that it is even yet impossible to solve many of the enigmas which they contain.
In other words, the claim is, “these things were hidden centuries ago, and no one has figured out the puzzle yet.” This presents two insurmountable problems for the accusation of concealment:
(1) If no one has managed to “solve the enigmas” of these degrees yet, how then can the claim be made that those of the “higher” degrees are concealing them, or that someone has taken a vow to conceal that which no one knows the meaning of in the first place? That is completely absurd.
(2) The claim that they were hidden “centuries” earlier is an anachronistic claim and a logical impossibility. It is amazing that Pike himself would not know the history of derivation of the Scottish Rite degrees. The predecessor of the Rite as we know it today was “The Order of the Royal Secret,” established under the Constitutions of 1762. The Rite was not extended to 33 degrees until the Grand Constitutions of 1786.
Anyone with the least familiarity with Masonry will understand the logical disjunct immediately: How could those of the “higher degrees” have been concealing secrets from those of the Blue Degrees for “centuries,” when Blue Lodge Masonry, with a modern founding in 1717,
predates the 33-degree Scottish Rite by 69 YEARS????
THAT is the 64,000-dollar question. When you can come up with an answer for it, only THEN may you again make any accusation worth listening to, concerning any “concealment among higher degree Masons.” Make the accusation again without providing any solution for this logical dilemma, and you only join the false accusers in their ridiculous assertions.
