Revd Neville Barker Cryer
Quoting from the March 1996 Masonic Square
(England)
On 10 August 1557, King Philip II of Spain
achieved a significant victory in the Low Countries. The details
of the campaign need not concern us here; but what is important
is that the battle which mattered most for him took place on the
Feast of St. Lawrence the Martyr. Accordingly, on his return
home, the King commanded that a search be made for a suitable
site on which he might erect a new monastery dedicated to that
saint.
This was partly because this devout monarch had
made a vow to this effect during the siege of St. Quentin. Also
because his father, Charles V, had left him the task of finding a
suitable place where he and other past and future members of the
Royal Family might be suitable interred.
A committee of philosophers, astrologers,
architects and masons finally recommended a hillside close to the
small town of El Escoril - some 24 kilometres south of Madrid.
The King approved their choice, and even decided on the monks of
the Order of St. Jerome as the occupants.
Classical Plan
This was not all. The plan of the building was
to be principally that of a gridiron; the traditional symbol of
St. Lawrence. Looked at from the air, this design is still
clearly visible today.
Within that pattern the central building was
the basilica, which formed the major part of the 'handle' of the
gridiron. Around the basilica's east end, however, were placed
the royal apartments - where Philip was to spend most of the
latter part of his life.
Indeed, any Englishman will be intrigued to
know that it was from his study here that King Philip planned and
directed the project which we call The Great Armada. This was the
fleet which, it was hoped, would defeat the English navy and
invade the English mainland, in order to re-establish the
Catholic Faith in this country. It was also here that Philip
received the unhappy news that his plan had failed.
The Escoril is therefore a place with as much
historical importance for Spain as are Windsor Castle and Hampton
Court for English people. It was an imaginative and evocative
place in which to hold a conference, and yet the University of
Madrid, which organised it, has regular summer courses there
every year. There are even two substantial and well-apppointed
hostels, liberally decorated with the gridiron motif, to house
both younger and more mature students, and their lecturers. It
was to one of these that I found myself allocated from 9-15 July
1995.
A Meaningful Conference
The conference to which I refer was part of the
usual summer programme of special subjects offered to regular and
extra-mural students; and was specailly arranged by a Professor
of Modern History from the University of Zaragoza who has a
special interest in the rise and development of Freemasonry in
Spain and Portugal.
Professor Jose de Ferrer Benimeli is a Jesuit
priest who has already written many substantial volumes on his
special subject; sadly, these works have not so far been
translated into English. For those able to read them, they
provide a mine of information about European Freemasonry that
would otherwise be difficult to acquire. Students of Iberian
Freemasonry would have all the significant facts at their
disposal.
Professor Benimeli has a formidable colleague
in Professor Aldo A. Mola of the University of Milan - who is
also Director of the Centre for the History of Freemasonry in
Rome. He has just published a 1,000 page History of Italian
Freemasonry which, unfortunately, is only available in Italian.
The purpose of the conference planned by these
two men, who acted as Chairman and Secretary during the week, was
to examine the question: 'Freemasonry and Religion: Acceptance,
Conflict or Incompatibility?' from as many angles as possible.
The aim was to have present brethren of various backgrounds who
could speak from experience of how they were able to relate their
Freemasonry to their church affiliation.
It was, for sure, a subject which affects many
people today, not least the Roman Catholic Church; which was
represented by both organisers and at least one non-mason
lecturer in Canon Law from the University of Salamanca.
Varied Denominations
It should be made clear, however, that both
those who gave the lectures here, and other speakers in the
debates, included practising Roman Catholics.
Some of us were from other traditions. From
France came a deacon of the Orthodox Church and a highly
respected Jewish rabbi; from England a Methodist layman and two
Anglican laymen; while from Spain there came two ministers, one
Evangelical and one Spanish Reformed Episcopal.
In all, there were sufficient speakers to have
two main addresses each morning, and a group of three or four
taking part in a round-table debate every afternoon at 5pm, after
a suitable siesta.
After each address, and in the later debate,
anyone in the audience could participate in Spanish, Portuguese,
French or English - for most of the week there were simultaneous
translators. There was thus as full a participation as possible
for those present.
The audience was also diverse. This was
sometimes 80 people, but the average was around 45. There were
sociology students of both sexes, including at least one student
from Madrid who was presenting a thesis on Freemasonry in Spain
for his Master's Degree. There were students of religion, and
several members, male and female, of some local congregations.
Among the wives of the participants, two, from Spain, were
themselves members of a masonic fraternity.
Others were enrolled adult members of the
Centre for Masonic Studies, directed by Professor Benimeli. Among
the freemasons present, there were those belonging to different
Grand Lodge traditions; and this proved important in highlighting
some of the issues which this conference uncovered.
It would be impossible, here, to cover all the
strands that emerged over the week. It is hoped that full
publication of the lectures will be made in Spanish, French and
English. But I should like to outline the main points that
emerged.
In Brief
1. While appreciating afresh - though for some
for the first time - the standpoint of the Grand Lodges in the UK
on religion and politics, it is clear that historical
circumstances in Europe generally had led to other stances,
including anti-clericalism, which were still around and felt to
have some, if decreasing, justification. There was a desire that
the 'British' attitude should be made better known.
2. It become evident, on presentation of the
Roman Catholic legal position, that there was still a firm
resistance in the Church to any layman's participation in masonic
activities. Equally that this judgement was still based on that
Church's conception of Continental practice. The British view of
religion as a purely private matter for each brother was not
taken into account. Freemasonry was still seen as an 'enemy' of
the Church.
3. In view of the generally critical approach
to Freemasonry by Evangelical Christians in Britain, it was
refreshing to hear pastors of their related Spanish churches
presenting a more balanced view. They were adamant about putting
one's church work and allegiance first; but they were equally
sure that the masonic fraternity was one they should be sharing
in - especially as Freemasonry had been, and was, one sure area
of 'toleration' in a society that could be religiously
intolerant. (RAH: Would that more churches would heed this
point.)
4. The presence of the present and incoming
Grand Masters of Spain, as well as the country's Sovereign Grand
Commander, demonstrated the range and nature of the week's
encounter. Universal and Christian Masonry were part of the
scene, and on a matter of common interest, both regular and
irregular brethren were able to speak in a neutral arena. When it
is recognised that all this took place in a meeting place with
strong Catholic associations, through the efforts of a Catholic
priest and secretary, paid for by an avowedly Catholic
University, then this meeting has to be acknowledged a distinct
step towards better understanding, as well as providing some hope
of creating useful ripples that may stretch one knows not where.
As one of the participants I can only express my personal view. I was extremely privileged to have been there. I learnt to see my own Freemasonry, and that of our United Grand Lodge, in a fresh and wider perspective. I made personal contacts that I hope will create still stronger links with wise masons and non-masons elsewhere.