Context: George Washington acknowledges the Illuminati Exists?

[TemplarJLS]

I originally found the quote here:

https://br.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20101012150743AAe5yn8

don't know about that quote, but this is well known: ""It is not my intention to doubt that the doctrine of the Illuminati and the principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more satisfied of this fact than I am."

Source: letter to George Washington Snyder, October 24, 1798, Mount Vernon, in The Writings of George Washington, vol. 20, p. 518. Washington acknowledged that the Illuminati had begun actively recruiting members from within the American lodges of Freemasonry.

http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quote/geor...

They've been around a lot longer than people think, huh?

The link he sourced provided the context:


http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quote/george_washington_quote_b726

"It is not my intention to doubt that the doctrine of the Illuminati and the principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more satisfied of this fact than I am.
The idea that I meant to convey, was, that I did not believe that the Lodges of Free Masons in _this_ Country had, as Societies, endeavoured to propagate the diabolical tenets of the first, or pernicious principles of the latter (if they are susceptible of separation). That Individuals of them may have done it, or that the founder, or instrument employed to found, the Democratic Societies in the United States, may have had these objects; and actually had a separation of the People from their Government in view, is too evident to be questioned."

Apparently it was a reply to Jedidiah Morse when Jedidiah sent his a copy of "Proofs of a Conspiracy" by John Robinson. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jedidiah_Morse#Illuminati_conspiracy_theory)

The source of the quote can be found here:

George Washington, The Writings of George Washington, Volume 14, 1798-1799, New York, G. P. Putmans Sons, 1893, p. 119

And the other quote that fuels this claim:

I have heard much of the nefarious, and dangerous plan, and doctrines of the Illuminati, but never saw the Book until you were pleased to send it to me.9 The same causes which have prevented my acknowledging the receipt of your letter have prevented my reading the Book, hitherto; namely, the multiplicity of matters which pressed upon me before, and the debilitated state in which I was left after, a severe fever had been removed. And which allows me to add little more now, than thanks for your kind wishes and favourable sentiments, except to correct an error you have run into, of my Presiding over the English lodges in this Country. The fact is, I preside over none, nor have I been in one more than once or twice, within the last thirty years. I believe notwithstanding, that none of the Lodges in this Country are contaminated with the principles ascribed to the Society of the Illuminati. With respect I am &c.

• This quote, again is George acknowledging John Robinson's book.

Source:http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/mgwfield(DOCID @lit(gw360346))

I don't understand what he meant by these two quotes. Can someone fill me in?

 

[WeedWhacker]

I don't understand what he meant by these two quotes. Can someone fill me in?

I am not fully grasping this either. The term "Jacobinism" was one I'd never encountered, before. SO I looked it up:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Jacobinism

Jacobinism
the practices of the Jacobins, a political group advocating equalitarian democracy during the French Revolution. — Jacobin, n. — Jacobinic, adj.

It refers to the "Jacobin" in France (at the time, late 1700s).

Jac·o·bin(j

k

-b

n)
n.
1. A radical or extreme leftist.
2. A radical republican during the French Revolution.

My "impression" of the modern CT re: the so-called "Illuminati" is that they are alleged to be very "right"-leaning.

This is extremely intriguing.

 

[Mick West]

Both quotes just say that he does not think the Freemasons have been infiltrated by the Illuminati.

The letter is from 1798. The Illuminati formed in 1776, and were disbanded in 1785. But there were a lot of conspiracy theories at the time about them still existing, and being shadowy figures behind the Freemasons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illuminati

The Illuminati (plural of Latin illuminatus, "enlightened") is a name given to several groups, both real and fictitious. Historically, the name refers to the Bavarian Illuminati, an Enlightenment-era secret society founded on May 1, 1776. The society's goals were to oppose superstition, prejudice, religious influence over public life and abuses of state power, and to support women's education and gender equality. The Illuminati—along with other secret societies—were outlawed by the Bavarian ruler, Charles Theodore, with the encouragement of the Roman Catholic Church, and were permanently disbanded in 1785.[1] In the several years following, the group was vilified by conservative and religious critics who claimed that they had regrouped and were responsible for the French Revolution [in 1789] .

 

[Mick West]

I don't understand what he meant by these two quotes. Can someone fill me in?

If the above does not clarify it, can you be more specific about what you don't understand?

 

[WeedWhacker]

The Illuminati formed in 1776, and were disbanded in 1785.

That seems to have cleared it up, and thanks for that research. Too bad that the "spectre" of the "Illuminati" continues to reign now,
via the Internet.

Edit to add.....from your "ex" box (see what I did there? Oh, nvm..) the external quotes seem to show that the "Illuminati" were actually a good aspect of human endeavour, not some sort of "Evil Empire" bent on world domination.

Women's education, and gender equality?? In the late 18th century??? (ETC...)...opposing superstition, and prejudice? Jeeze, we could USE them here, now....today!!!

 

[Efftup]

Yes, many people seem to claim the illuminati were some kind of evil world domination lot.
I am really not sure where they get this from.
I think Thomas Jefferson (who gets accused of being a freemason AND illuminist on conspiracy sites with no back up)apparently had said of them that if they wanted to write their pamphlets or spread their ideas in the USA, then they wouldn't have had to do it in secret.
As far as I have read, the Bavarian ruler saw them as a direct threat and moved to have them outlawed.

 

[WeedWhacker]

I think Thomas Jefferson (who gets accused of being a freemason AND illuminist on conspiracy sites with no back up)apparently had said of them that if they wanted to write their pamphlets or spread their ideas in the USA, then they wouldn't have had to do it in secret.
As far as I have read, the Bavarian ruler saw them as a direct threat and moved to have them outlawed.

Yeah....in my (admittedly limited, so far) research, this so-called "Illuminati" appear to be more what we'd call, today, "socialist liberals".

Odd that this term for them has become some sort of "conspiracy theorist" rallying point.

(Adding....the term "shill" has also been corrupted, as a modern Internet meme.)

 

[TemplarJLS]

The problem I'm having trouble with are these two parts of the quotes:

"It is not my intention to doubt that the doctrine of the Illuminati and the principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more satisfied of this fact than I am.

And this:

That Individuals of them may have done it, or that the founder, or instrument employed to found, the Democratic Societies in the United States, may have had these objects; and actually had a separation of the People from their Government in view, is too evident to be questioned."

It seems to imply the democratic societies were founded by the illuminati.

 

[Mick West]

It seems to imply the democratic societies were founded by the illuminati.

No it does not. It says that there were some individuals who has attempted to spread the principles of the illuminati. He does not think there is an Illuminati.

 

[Mick West]

There's a bit of confusion with:

That Individuals of them may have done it, or that the founder, or instrument employed to found, the Democratic Societies in the United States, may have had these objects; and actually had a separation of the People from their Government in view, is too evident to be questioned."

We think of "Democratic Societies" to refer to countries that are democracies. So what are "Democratic Societies in the United States?"

At it seems that historically the term "Democratic Societies" actually refers to organizations like Freemasons and trade associations. So there he's saying there are some individuals who want to spread the principles of the Illuminati (progressivism), who were involved in founding Masonic lodges in the US.

Example usage:
http://freemasonry.bcy.ca/biography/garibaldi_g/garibaldi.html

"Why do not all the Italian associations inclined to good," he asked himself in 1873, "join together and place themselves, for the love of indispensable discipline, under the democratic banner of the Pact of Rome? [...]. Why does not the most ancient and the most revered of democratic societies, Freemasonry, set an example of conciliation under the Italian fasces? Why do not societies — working class, international, artisan etc. incorporate universal Brotherhood into their emblems like Freemasonry.

 

[McGurnicle]

Yeah....in my (admittedly limited, so far) research, this so-called "Illuminati" appear to be more what we'd call, today, "socialist liberals".

Odd that this term for them has become some sort of "conspiracy theorist" rallying point.

I've always admired Wieshaupt, he was a man that sought to overthrow the tyranny of ignorance and superstition by attempting to instill the principles of reason and justice within influential individuals. It's little wonder that the man would be demonized by State and Church alike.

"In this time, when the games and abuses of secret societies were without end, I wanted to make use of this human weakness for a real and worthy goal, the welfare of mankind.… I wanted what the heads of the ecclesiastical and secular powers should do and want by virtue of their offices ... The tranquility of our consciences is not troubled by the reproach of aiming at the ruin or overthrow of states or thrones." Adam Wieshaupt

Here are Thomas Jefferson's thoughts on Wieshaupt:
"As Wishaupt lived under the tyranny of a despot & priests, he knew that caution was necessary even in spreading information, & the principles of pure morality. He proposed therefore to lead the Free masons to adopt this object & to make the objects of their institution the diffusion of science & virtue. He proposed to initiate new members into his body by gradations proportioned to his fears of the thunderbolts of tyranny. This has given an air of mystery to his views, was the foundation of his banishment, the subversion of the masonic order, & is the colour for the ravings against him of Robinson, Barruel & Morse, whose real fears are that the craft would be endangered by the spreading of information, reason, & natural morality among men. This subject being new to me, I have imagined that if it be so to you also, you may receive the same satisfaction in seeing, which I have had in forming the analysis of it: & I believe you will think with me that if Wishaupt had written here, where no secrecy is necessary in our endeavors to render men wise & virtuous, he would not have thought of any secret machinery for that purpose. As Godwin, if he had written in Germany, might probably also have thought secrecy & mysticism prudent. I will say nothing to you on the late revolution of France, which is painfully interesting. Perhaps when we know more of the circumstances which gave rise to it, & the direction it will take, Buonaparte, its chief organ, may stand in a better light than at present. I am with great esteem, dear sir, your affectionate friend."

Thomas Jefferson to Reverend James Madison, January 31, 1800

 

[Jason]

The problem I'm having trouble with are these two parts of the quotes:

"It is not my intention to doubt that the doctrine of the Illuminati and the principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more satisfied of this fact than I am.

And this:

That Individuals of them may have done it, or that the founder, or instrument employed to found, the Democratic Societies in the United States, may have had these objects; and actually had a separation of the People from their Government in view, is too evident to be questioned."

It seems to imply that democratic societies were founded by the illuminati.

Actually I think Pres Washington is referring to the fact that there "might" have been democratic societies either created or influenced by the the Illuminati, more specifically that the Illuminati might have infiltrated the Freemasons. Also GW doesn't pretend to believe it hasn't spread to the US in the following statement; On the contrary, no one is more truly satisfied of this fact than I am. I think there was a slight concern at the time of these "democratic societies" having influence over people's beliefs, which in turn gave people a "separation from government" belief system ("actually had a separation of the People from their Government in view, is too evident to be questioned."). While he was a freemason himself, I don't think he cared much for the Illuminati, and I think he believes the Illuminati were created with one goal in mind and that was to infiltrate the Freemasons.

 

[Fabio]

Hi from Germany,

I do not understand wether Washington was in favour of the ideas put forth by Weishaupt or not.
On one hand he says:

"It was not my intention to doubt that, the Doctrines of the Illuminati, and principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more truly satisfied of this fact than I am."

On the other:

"...to propagate the diabolical tenets of the first, or pernicious principles of the latter (if they are susceptible of seperation)."

So he is "truly satisfied" (= quite happy) that the principles had spread in the US, but then he calls them "diabolical"? Did "to be satisfied" have another meaning at the time, like "to be fully aware of" or was he ironic in the sense that he actually liked the anti-authoritarian ideas of the Illuminati (like Jefferson did) and wanted to make fun of the reverend?

Thank you!

Fabio

 

[Mick West]

"truly satisfied of this fact" means (then and now) that he believes it is true. It does not mean it makes him happy that it is is true.

The thing that is being "satisfied" is the evidence supporting the claim. It's somewhat legalistic and old-fashioned speech. A clearer wording would be "convinced by the evidence that this is true""

 

[Fabio]

Thank you! So he is opposed to the ideas of the Illuminati, because they are too libertarian ("separate people from their government")? It is strange to me that me might call those ideas "diabolical" whereas Jefferson agreed on them.

 

[Mick West]

Thank you! So he is opposed to the ideas of the Illuminati, because they are too libertarian ("separate people from their government")? It is strange to me that me might call those ideas "diabolical" whereas Jefferson agreed on them.

It's not at all clear exactly which "tenets" Washington is referring to, or what he thinks is diabolical about them. It could simply be a religious thing.

 

[Fabio]

I do think the context suggests Washington was referring to "separate people from their government". It is the only example of any activity of those "diabolical" Illuminati he gives in that short letter. He could have mentioned "separate the people from their Creator" if it had been a religious thing.