{ } = word or expression can't be understood
{word} = hard to understand, might be this

Ladies and gentlemen, I have been asked to remind you, or to tell you that at 4 o'clock there is, in the humanity -- here -- building, the panel on Abraham Lincoln. And Professor Nevins is going to speak, who heads the Huntington Library, and who is the author of the book which I have asked you to read. So I think anybody who hasn't met the gentleman should go there, come to know him. It's at 4 o'clock.

We have joined the battle between the admitted religious attitude of the 18th century and the admitted political, or pronouncedly political attitude of the 19th; and we have tried to see that with all the efforts of separation of Church and state, things are much more complicated than it would look at first sight. That is, we found that the symbols of the revealed religion of Christianity and Judaism were replaced on the currency, on the greenbacks by a strange symbol, the pyramid. And however, with the great pretense, that "annuit coeptis," that God would approve, would give His nod, literally, to the beginnings. That's very similar to the famous coin Elizabeth of England had made after the Armada was defeated -- the Spanish Armada, in 1588: "Afflavit Deus et dissipati sunt"; "God blew, and the Armada was dispersed in all the winds." It is -- "afflavit" and "annuit" are very much corre- -- related terms. God nods, and God blows. God inspires. The spirit is our common breath.

If you want to get out of the many useless debates today about the divine presence, I -- recommend to you the very simple, simple physiological or physical explanation of the spirit, that it is common breathing. People are inspired when they have a common breath. And that's of course, as all incarnation of the divine, a very real, very concrete, very touchable and tangible thing; much more tangible than your so-called thoughts, for which I do not give a damn.

The spirit moves people when they breathe together. You breathe singly. That we call "breath." The Latin word "spiritus" is the same for breath and common spirit. There's no difference. And anybody who is inspired is a man who is able to make other people breathe in his own way, in his rhythm, in his manner. That's an inspiration. When you go to Will Rodgers State Park, and there is Inspiration Point. And there he made all his money. That is, other people listened to him, and breathed with him, and where -- got his inspiration, and it is carried over.

And I couldn't speak to you if you would not innervate with me. Hearing, gentlemen, is speaking with the speaker. You cannot hear me if you do not vibrate in a s- -- way in which I speak. Any acoustic -- law of acoustic will tell

you this, that the way you listen is by getting your own membranes, you see, vibrating in the same way in which I pronounce. And since I pronounce not quite as you, you have more difficulty of understanding, because your vibration is not easily in tune with my words. So spirit is common breathing. And any political commonwealth of course must have, therefore, a common spirit, an inspiration.

And before then moving on to the attempt of the Jeffersonians in 1780 to create a new set of American and worldwide symbols, I thought it might be worth our while to mention a few incidents in American history of the last 150 years, where the religious reductionism, the min- -- minute, minimum, so to speak, quantity of religious inspiration came to the fore. One is, of course, Washington's Farewell Address. And there's a very strange sentence in this. I think it has been abused so thoroughly by the clerk of the Congress, who has to read it so often, when the people get up on a filibuster, that it -- it may be no longer very resounding. But I think there are two passages in the Farewell Address, which I recommend to your attention.

One is a strange statement--I think it would be strange if you heard it today--"with slight shades of difference, you have the same religion." That's quite an interesting statement at a moment in which there were perhaps only 10 percent of the inhabitants of this country, 3 million people all told, min- -- members of churches. As you know, the year -- 1800 was the all-time low percentage of membership in churches in this -- on this continent. Now there are 60 percent; then there were 10 percent. Just the same, including the 90 or -- percent, the president -- Wash- -- George Washington could say in 1799--or when was it? -- 1796?--the -- "The name of `American' must always exalt the just pride of patriotism. With slight shades of difference, you have the same religion."

Then he has a long passage on religion, in the later part, which most of you also will at some time or other perhaps have had heard of, and:

"Let it simply be asked where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instrument of investigation in courts of justice. And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. National morality cannot prevail in exclusion of religious principle."

Strange language for me, I mean I -- wouldn't express it in this rather odd and sch- -- scholarly manner: "National morality cannot prevail in exclusion of religious principle."

But it is interesting that the president of the United States makes it a point

to discuss religion. Then we come to the middle of the 19th century, and I think again you are quite well -- acquainted with the Second Inaugural, which I think is greater than the Gettysburg Address. And I can only tell you that when I climbed these -- the steps in Washington to the Lincoln Memorial, and read these words all over, a -- a shiver went over my spine, because I said to me, it is obvious that the Americans had to win the -- these two world wars because no European statesman can speak in this tone, in this Shakespearean, in this biblical tone. And I think that the American mind today, the intellectuals, Greenwich Village, and--where are the Millerites? I don't know--the people who now think that they must save the American mentality, have really no idea where the superiority of this country over the old countries lie.

I had to listen to a speech the poor Queen Elizabeth II had to make. Of course it's -- it's too bad that she has to make any speeches. But she dared to say to -- their -- her countrymen, "Let us enjoy our accumulated civilization." Now that's the end of any empire. You can believe, gentlemen, if -- if the propaganda of a chamber of commerce would do better, even with sunshine in California. "Let us enjoy our accumulated civilization." Gentlemen, that's the end of any country, and of any nation, and of any people. And since the mere, bare, barren intellect cannot offer anything other but accumulation, addition, sums, quantity, you see, how much bigger cars, and so on, the West is in this sense absolutely on the way out. I -- wouldn't give a -- a farthing for a -- kingdom or a commonwealth that is governed by a ruler who has to speak at a solemn occasion as what -- of the New Year's Day or Christmas Day, I've forgotten, "Let us enjoy our accumulated civilization." Neither the word "civilization," nor "enjoy," nor "accumulated," you see, is able to hold people together in a panic, and in a fearsome moment. That's the end of the world. And you must learn this.

History proves this, gentlemen. A heap of things may be good for Woolworth, but they aren't good for life. And certainly are they not good for common life, because an inspiration means rhythm. Now "accumulation" you see, they -- they -- follow the law of gravity. They can't move. They can't set you into motion. Where we want to live together, we must be footloose. We cannot be burdened with things. We cannot be burdened with accumulated wealth, or accumulation of cars, seven cars in every garage. That doesn't help. You have to live together in peace, and satisfaction, and liberty without things. And so I felt -- my heart sank really when I heard this poor woman say, "Let us enjoy our accumulated civilization."

Will you kindly hear instead what Abraham Lincoln had to say?

"Both read the same Bible, and pray to the same God"--the South and the North. "Each invokes his aid against the other. It may seem strange that any man should dare to ask as a just god's --

existence in wringing bread from the sweat of other men's faces. But let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayer of both should not be answered. That of neither has been answered fully, for the Almighty has His own purposes. Woe unto the world because of offenses, for it must needs be that offense come. But woe unto that man by whom the offense cometh. If we shall suppose American slavery one of those offenses which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South this terrible war as was due to those by whom the offense came, shall we discern that there is any departure from those divine attributes, which believers in the living God always ascribe to Him?"

Now comes the greatest sentence of them all:

"And yet, if it be God's will that it continue until the wealth piled by bondsmen by 250 years' unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was then 3,000 years ago, sto- -- still it must be said that the judgments of the Lord are true, and righteous altogether."

Now that's language, and that keeps a nation together. And we are today devoid of this power. As you know, the president, in -- when he went to Paris last year, asked a statesman of Europe, to their great astonishment, to sit in silent prayer for five minutes. That is, we have today -- he has still a room for religion, but it is a hyphen. It's a dash. No words. It's the opposite. It's silence. You can get people together to be silent together in prayer, but you can't -- don't dare to word it anymore. However, there's an interesting sideline to this dying-out of the religious connotation of the president's office and his right to speak his mind on these matters, with the hope that everybody is inspired. That is perhaps unknown, strangely enough, within the borders of the United States. But it has also made a great impression on Europe, and I think an obnoxious one, a damaging one.

If you apply religion not to -- in your -- inside your own house, but only outside, it makes of course a rather terrifying impression. This has been done by America, and so I can testify to this, because I am myself the -- so to speak, the effect of this.

When the -- we lost the war--I was a German soldier at that time--I sat down and wrote in the July of 1918, when the American troops first had come forward on the Marne--a paper, "The Crusade of the Star-Spangled Banner." The Crusade of the Star-Spangled Banner. And I still think that I have expressed at that time, { } at the front line at Verdun the -- the conflict between America and Europe in very clear lines. That is not what I'm going to say -- what I'm

going to stress. What I want to stress is only that the crusade, you see, the religious connotation of the war for the Americans, was very clear to me at that time. And I mention it, because President Eisenhower has entitled his book about the Second World War, Crusade in Europe. I think it's a very dangerous name, and a very wrong name for a part of the western world to -- to say this. I know how it has come about, since I have written myself--that's why I mention my own participation in this--40 years ago gave the same title, you see, "The Crusade of the Star-Spangled Banner." I was, of course, thunderstruck that the president of the United States 40 years later -- 30 years later called his own engagement in the war again a "crusade."

What is a crusade? A crusade is the -- led against the infidels. And therefore at this moment, the Americans are in a danger spot. Inside, they would uphold, I think -- if I had taken a vote at the beginning of this class, you would have said that nobody can mention religion in a political meeting today with a hope of success. And that it -- more divisive than unifying. -- But you see, the -- still the president felt that he could write a book, The Crusade of the Star-Spangled Banner, without giving offense inside, because everybody would only, you see, see the better, the -- the superiority of the Americans as a whole, compared to the -- to the villains on the other side.

Now I think that has always to do with religion, because our assurance that other people are estranged from the inspiration center more than we, that we are nearer to God, you see--you remember what we said last time--is of course an addition of any religious attitude. So when you say, "Crusade in Europe," you mean to say, you can't help it that the Americans are nearer to God than the benighted people against whom the war has to be fought.

And so I think it is important that you should know that the word "crusade" used by this -- for this last emergency, and for the previous one, the two world wars, is in absolute line with the conviction of the founding fathers, George Washington, and with Abraham Lincoln, that you cannot fight without religious conviction. You cannot. There is no war possible if the soldiers cannot believe that their suff- -- that they have been -- examined their cause and have not found it wanting.

That's why I had to tell one of you in this classroom the other day, to his great -- to his great--I think he was very disgusted with me, and perhaps still is--that before he had served in the army, I couldn't discuss political matters with him, because it's a testing ground, whether you want to serve or not. After you have served, I'm willing to discuss political matters.

This is a great problem, because I do think that this is the last time that the

president of the United States will be able -- he wasn't president at the time. He was just the -- had been the commander of the forces, Crusade in Europe. And it is well worth your while to trace this word, "Eur-" -- "crusade." This is the first time that it is officially used in our occidental history. And the last crusade was the Battle of Lepanto, 1572 or 1570, I'm not quite sure, of d'Ua- -- Dua- -- Juan d'Austria against the Turks. So there is -- as you know, the Knights of Columbus also are happy to think of Columbus as a crusader. And there is some -- some title to this, that he felt that he was perhaps on a crusade against {the infidels}.

So the word "crusade" has a long story behind it. But it was pooh-poohed from 1570 on, because it was a -- a word of the counter-Reformation. The Reformed and Protestant churches would have nothing to do with crusades, because they felt they might be- -- the -- -come the victims of these crusades.

Therefore the stepping into the shoes of the crusades by the president in 1950 is a remarkable performance, because the word is now, you see -- means that the divisions in America, between Catholics, and Protestants, and Jews can be neglected, that the -- an issue that forbade the Protestants for 300 years ever to use the word "crusade," you see, that this is, so to speak, superannuated, that it is dated, and that you can use an old term, so to speak, from history books in a new sense, in a fresh sense, and as a term of unity, without any danger of -- of mak- -- creating a rift between the denominations in this country. I think that's quite important that the word "crusade" is the annexation of the Middle Ages by the United States. Just as you do with the missions here, to a large extent, the -- we can say that the event of the -- the process of the 19th century has been that in the last 150 years, because religion was pushed into the background, into the second rank, and the political scene took the limelight, that underneath this -- this transformation of the public language, the divisions in Christ- -- within the faith, within the western tradition, between Jews, Catholics, and Protestants, have become negligible. And when I read {Will Herberg's} book on the denominations in this country, or any such book, it always strikes me that the differences are much smaller than the absence of religion of all -- on all sides.

The -- they are all lukewarm. They are all, so to speak, melted down to nothingness at this moment. And therefore the {word} "crusade" is the expression of a national religion. You can even say of a nationalistic religion, because it is no longer impregnated with the -- an idea of bringing a religious faith to these other places, but just makes them behave. That's the whole content of this crusade idea. No idea of -- of mission in the wider sense. Or only in a secular sense you may say that the crusading spirit of the Americans was -- makes itself still felt in bringing free institutions to Europe and -- and reeducating the -- the maltreated nations.

But we shall see at the end of the course, I hope, that the real religious faith of the Americans was in the Marshall Plan, and in such steps into a wider world and much less in the idea of a crusade of ending -- against infidels.

However this may be, I over -- what I'm stressing is, don't be betrayed by your own aversion against these concepts, and against these emblems, and against these symbols. This country as a whole has only been able to fight wars under the guidance of such religious ideas, and banners, and this, I think, is important, because the -- the powers, the energies, the -- the -- by virtue of which this country is one country, has an army, has an air force, has elections, and is going places, have to be recognized for what they are. And they are not private an- -- aggrandizement, and wealth--just as -- as Lincoln expresses this--if 250 years of wealth are destroyed in this war, and they nearly war in the Civil War, as you -- were in the Civil War, it would still be necessary to put out this -- this darkness, you see, of slavery. That's the word by which you can unite people. And you can never unite people by happiness, wealth, riches, or some such satisfaction. That always divides. If a rich man gives money to a poor man as a present, the only danger is that he makes an enemy.

I had a friend who was very rich indeed. He had $100 million. And he said to his son on his deathbed, "My son -- you are wealthy. You will have to make -- make loans, and give -- help other people. Do it. Never loan, because they will -- never lend -- anybody, because they will resent it forever. If you give it to them as a present, you may not make an enemy. But that's the most you can hope." And that of course is, at this moment, the dan- -- the situation of -- for -- of Americans with the rest of the nations too, you see, that -- look at South America. One doesn't make friends by gifts. The ladies -- the charitable ladies should understand this, too. -- Would -- {then} have -- no charity balls, any more, and such things. Charity doesn't make friends, this organized charity, just helping others. That's an abuse of charity. That's not the charity of the Gospel.

And we live in such a world in which you are really all in danger to forget that peace and cohesion of a nation, of any group, is not based on anyth- -- such thing as external gifts. They -- if they express your feelings as symbols, then it's all right, from the overflow of your heart. But if it's -- you stop the overflow of your heart, and only use the overflow of your bank account, it doesn't work.

I had an aunt who always made presents. The -- she was one of these charity ladies. And she always was very proud if she could -- gave a present that looked like $10 and had only cost $5. It seems to be the essential care of some housewives.

So the story of this country is a strange one. Reductionism of the religious,

but never an ability to give it -- abandon it in times of emergency. And as I said, the last appeal, the crusade--who, by the way, has seen Mr. Eisenhower's book? Who has it? You're the only one? Oh, heavens. He was so much nicer when he was commander-in-chief.

No, read this book. It's a very amiable book. There's a wonderful story in there where he meets a buddy at the Rhine River in the night of the -- when they tried to cross over. And I think that's his master -- the best -- piece in the book. And you couldn't find it in any other but an American general's book, that he finds a buddy there, standing on the river and -- on guard. And he -- he -- the boy is frightened, when the general turns up in the dark of the night there, behind him. And the general says, "You are a little nervous, are you, Buddy?" And he says, "Yes, I am, indeed."

So he says, "I'm, too." And walks for a few hundred yards with the man. And I think that's a wonderful story, that the -- the general says to the man, "I am, too."

And this is the brotherhood of man of which you cannot in this country know how different it is from any other country in the world. That is religious, and is nothing else. And it certainly is not intellectual. It may not even be intelligent, but it is there. When an English and an American general stood together in -- in -- in France, the English said -- pestered the American and said, "You have no discipline. It's just terrible. You will never have an army. They do what they please, your people."

And at that moment, a boy turned up, a private, and said to the general, "May I have your car? I want to take my girl out."

And the general said, "Take it. Take it -- take her."

And so the -- the English general jeered of course, and said, "There you are! Isn't that incredible?"

And the American general was puzzled and said, "Well, but he might have taken the car without asking me."

If you see this constancy, you understand that history cannot forget what remains, despite a fight to the contrary. That is, it is a very slow process, the replacing of secular symbols -- by secular symbols of the old religious fab- -- fabric. And -- as I see it, in- -- inside this country, I -- this has been done. And that's why I think people no longer care for election speeches, because they are so drab. They are so boring. If you do not appeal to your highest emotions and

feeling, it's politics. And that's why there is such, you see, lull in politics. It makes no appeal to the -- to the better man in us.

That's very serious this time, I think. But for the world at large, Americans are still missionaries. You must understand this. The picture which the world has gotten--and I think rightly so--from the endeavors of the Americans of the last 150 years, that it has always understood that a Christian is not a Christian unless he makes converts. And I have certainly only to underwrite this. You cannot be -- a Christian if you do not make at least one convert in your life. Then it's all nonsense. You cannot be privately a -- a Christian, as a thinker can, or an intellectual. That's the difference, you see, because singing is outgoing, you see, is communication. If it isn't, there's no spirit.

And so the Americans pose in the rest of the world as the greatest missionaries the world has ever seen, after the Franciscans, and the -- perhaps and the Jesuits in -- in the East, in the 17th and 16th century. And this has to be said with great strength, because it has been an incredible asset that Americans have been missionaries, whether they go to Turkey, and to Roberts College in Beirut, or wherever you turn, you see, it is the mission there, the mission school that has created good will to an extent which is quite unbelievable for here.

I know the story privately, personally -- and I think I should add this at this moment, perhaps. There was a dentist in Kansas City in 1872. There was a revival meeting of the Presbyterians--don't know how the Presbyterians ever had a revival meeting, perhaps it was another group--but next morning he passed the office of the United Presbyterians in Kansas, and offered his services. He was moved to serve the Lord. And the people sent him to the center of Egypt, to a -- a city called Asyut. And he established there, with the help of the Presbyterians--he was a dentist, he was not a trained theologian, he was not even a trained doctor, he--a hospital. And it is the pride of central Egypt to this day. It's very famous. It is now an Egyptian institution. His son became the dentist to the king of Egypt. But -- and then he became the representative of -- Standard Oil for the Near East. And his son is now -- his son is now the -- our diplomatic representative in Jidda, at the court of Ibn-Saud. There you have three gen- -- American generations. And you will never understand Mr. Henry Luce unless you know that his father was a missionary.

Well, I'm very -- that's very -- I'm very serious. This is the background of most American enterprising men. All this talk of free enterprise is just nonsense. The parents of these great enterprise men were of a very different spirit, but they knew what the spirit is and how you mu- -- move Heaven and earth, and how the great fearlessness of the American comes from this missionary tradition, and not just from shooting Indians.

And since this is never said by Americans -- native Americans--I should tell you this--that the picture which the rest of the world has of you fortunately does not only consist of movie stars, and divorces, and shootings, and murders, and Wild West stories, but in the essence it consists of the picture of the American as a missionary. And the word "crusade" cinches this in the sense that for external, you see, consumption, the crusade is still valid, I mean. Even at this moment, I would suggest that the achievements of the Americans abroad, by serving as observers, as men of good will, as go-betweens, is of infinite value. The C- -- whole Cyprus issue--has been solved by this very simple method, that Americans were sitting in without wanting anything for themselves, and peace is restored on Cyprus between Turks, Greeks, and English, only through the Americans. And they have been missionaries in this sense, because they believe, you see, in this new inspiration. And I don't see why the papers here don't give more credit to us in this matter, because "That's the spirit," as we say.

And I think this word again is from the vo- -- eternal vocabulary of America. Doesn't exist in any other country in this sense: "That's the spirit." What do we mean by "That's the spirit"? That people get together. If you say in French, l'esprit, that's just the -- the -- the individual gen- -- genius, you see. Il -- il a l'esprit. He has, you see, his own lightning, and his own sparks. And we couldn't say that, you see. A man in this country has still -- is still part of the public spirit, and of the common spirit. And I think the word "spirit" here isn't yet dead. It is absolutely dead on the -- in -- in Europe, through this abuse that it has been made to mean simply "a great mind," "g‚nie." And that's why I feel that the intellectuals in this country serve their country very poorly, because they have taken over from the French something utterly un-American, of a private and individual mentality. Even the word "mentality" is not a good American or an Anglo-Saxon term. It's just borrowed from -- again from the French "mentalit‚." And here, when you mean that the -- group is in order, you say, "That's the spirit," to any person. What -- wha- -- he is moved by what is needed by the community. Isn't that true? And don't be -- don't give this up. I think American history must come to an end, as soon as the word "spirit" is misunderstood in the intellectual sense, that a man has spirit. This spirit is more powerful than you and me. It dominates us. He dominates us. He is a person, and we are no persons. But this cult of -- of private personality has just led to the complete break- -- nervous breakdown of every human being. We are overasked if we are to have the spirit. We can only be healthy if some common spirit moves you and me.

This is the American tradition, and it is still in force with the rest of the world. And here it's dying out. And it is with these millions of years of light, you know, that travels through space, when the star already is completely dead and gives off no light, the light finally arrives at the person who then sees it from the -- on this globe. Very strange situation, that dead stars still seem to shine.

Now it seems to me that the soul of America is in exactly this position at this moment, gentlemen, that here, we are much deader than the rest of the world thinks we are, because to -- everybody here laughs. We withdraw our missions from China, and so everything is going to pieces. And so the word "mission" has no good ring anymore. But as I told you, gentlemen, you have -- only have this spirit if you create out of the loins of your spirit just as many successors as you create physical children. It's very nice to have large families, as they seem to have now, but that's only one-half of the story. The women get the many children -- no hardship for the men. But the -- the men have -- just parallel to this, you see, beget so many disciples, so many adherents to the right spirit. Not disciples of themselves, but of the right spirit.

And the whole academic world, as you can imagine, has been under my indictment for the -- my whole life, because we -- my colleagues think they have the -- the power or the right to teach just chaff. Unspiri- -- dispirited facts. I'm not a teacher in { }. I can drill you, like apes, with facts. But I'm here to convey to you this spirit that has kept mankind alive. Otherwise I wouldn't be an historian; and otherwise I wouldn't be a teacher. And I think it's an abuse of the academic privileges for s- -- you to sit there and to criticize, instead of first listening. How can anybody criticize who hasn't listened, who doesn't know what -- what we are -- I'm talking about? And how can a teacher be a teacher if he only takes mechanical examination with "yes" and "no"? And never knows if the boy has understood anything?

I defy all these things. I'm old enough to do this. They can throw me out. I think we are in a very bad way, and the source of the hardship un- -- under which this nation is suffering are the academic institutions, the schools. They are the sources of the wrong that is done to the human mind in this country. We are -- we, with our privileges, we do not kindle any fire and any flame. Quite the contrary, suspended animation, examination. Anybody who wants to recover from this has to -- has to -- has to destroy the mentality which he gets when he goes into examinations. That's a curse. How can you have a spirit and take examinations?

Pardon me?

(Oh. Does that mean there's going to be no examination?)

I wish. There are ways of getting around it.

But perhaps you see the unity of all these things. Our -- the schools in the 18th century were religious institutions. And they have lingered on, just as the "Crusade of the Star-Spangled Banner," for a hundred year- -- more under the

inspiration. When I came to Dartmouth College, I learned that -- until 1892--and mind you, that's an important date, for many reasons, all over the world, the -- eight years before the end of the 19th century, God died, as Nietzsche proclaimed with great dismay, by the way. Nietzsche is in this country reckoned as an atheist. But he only accused the people who -- who spoke of God, you see, that they had killed Him.

And well, what happened? My -- the president, Bartlett, of my Dartmouth College, the { }, gave to the seniors every year a course in universal history, in which he comprised the march of events from the beginning to the end as one great, inspirational, you see, commission, so to speak, to this class to continue. This was not history in a different -- see, country, and in a different setting. This was not Jewish history, Greek history, or Roman history. It was their history. It was the history they had to continue. And no other history course existed. There were no science departments in this very, very strange college. I mean, they -- had one globe, I mean, one globus, you know. That's -- was all the -- called the philosophical apparatus. And -- that was all the philosophy they had. But they had the universal history. That is, they had still in -- in New England the feeling that they were on the march, continuing the march of all the centuries in back of them. And that's education. And no -- nothing else is education. If you cut that out, and whittle this away, then you are lost, you are uprooted.

And so I have always felt privileged that I was allowed to step, so to speak, into this man's shoes, or as a -- with a gap of 40 years.

Let's now turn to the attempt, the very honest attempt of the Free Masons to make appeals to crusades, to religion and so, more or less superfluous, or make them secular. That is, the main attempt of Free Masonry is to do without a clergy. And in this sense, Lincoln is a good example. He speaks much better than a preacher, but he is a layman. He didn't belong to any church -- denomination, as you may know, but he was a Mason. And most presidents of the United States have been Masons. That's unknown. It's never in the books. But it's very important. Some of them would never have been elected unless they had been Masons. Not all of them have been Masons. But you must know that Masonry has had a tremendous part, as much as Methodism, in the political grouping of the machines, of the machine politicians. That's why I have to mention it for you, because I'm speaking in here -- in this course of all the powers that group men. And Free Masonry was a power to group.

In which sense? What is Free Masonry?

Well, here out West, you see, we -- you have many myths, and allegories, and stories. And so in Santa Clara, I understand there--I have visited it

myself--there is an institute that tells you that the Rosicrucians are as old as the Egyptians. And some other people of course tell you that the Free Masons are as old as the -- Old Testament, I mean, as a matter of fact, all these -- or at least as old as the Templars in France. It's nothing of the kind. I -- from quite other -- for quite other reasons, I had to go into the history of the Masons and the Rosicrucians very carefully. And it is important to know that the need for regrouping has created both. The Rosicrucians saw the -- horrors on the continent of Europe wrought by the division of the Protestants and Catholics; and Rosicrucianism was cre- -- the creation of a very fine man, Valentin Andre„ in 1625.

I mention this, because since I am going against the superstitions about the Free Masons, I feel this good man should also get his due about his very harmless Rosicrucianism, Valentin Andre„. And he never gets his honor -- unless you see that it is a very sober undertaking to fight the evil of the counterReformation, or the enmity, or the -- of the Inquisition, and of all the religious wars. The second step then taken was when the union occurred between Scotland and England. The Scotch and the England -- English could not have Communion together. The Engl- -- Scottish parliament, however, in 1708 was moved to London. And it became of the most practical necessity to draw the members of Scotland and of -- English Parliament together in a close, intimate, spiritual union, despite the fact that the Archbishop of York and the head of the Scotch Church could not take Communion together.

It's an interesting story. In 1922, one brother was Archbishop of Canterbury -- 1922, and one was head of the Scotch Church. And they went to Communion together and abolished the wall between -- the partition between the two churches. That's, I think, an important story. And it ended the cause which had brought into being the importance -- the political role of Free Masonry. Free Masons began as a dinner table, with a common ritual, you see, of a secular nature which allowed an invocation of the Almighty without the common prayer{book}. Do you understand? So the Free Mason ritual was at that time an attempt to create a generalization of the ritual. A more general approach -- which neither the Presbyterian nor an Episcopalian could take offense.

And in 1717, this had been proven so valuable that the Grand Lodge of England was started. That is, they organized in such a way that they allowed members of the lodge who traveled and so to start others in other places. And it took like wildfire, because the world at that time was absolutely fed up with the denominational quarrels, where every king and every prince had had the right to have a religion of his own, so to speak. And if you traveled on the continent between the various states, it was just intolerable that you should not be able to meet on the most intimate terms with a man of a another -- complexion.

So Free Masonry became the weapon of overcoming the divisions within the Protestant fold at first. And Engla- -- Eng- -- England has played more or less this role. The first lodge in this country was started in 1733 in Boston. It's a date also perhaps for you to remember. Sixteen years already after the English lodge in London, you see, the -- Boston, as always, you see, the hub of the universe, would get its spiritual degree.

Thank you.