Three growing questions about Masonry  

Through three capital questions, this short essay tries to offer a general panorama and a better understanding of the proteiform complex body or Masonry. Through by a multi-level hermeneutic, this study get the ambition to be comprehensible both to Readers who are not used to this kind of literature and to the ones advanced and skilled in symbolic thought. The main important conclusion owes the quality of the symbolic level, which is the property to refuse a single interpretation: notwithstanding, this does not prevent from a clear historical and political evaluation of the phenomena under analysis, according the methodologies of social sciences. This political evaluability drives to the main valuable output of the essay, which concerns the anthropological statement that the logical label of Masonry, with this name or many others, it exists since always. Under the category of initiatory institution, we may consider the step between individual and society, and a society inside a larger one. Evolving from the needs of the individuals to the ones of social groups, the matter joins to the land of political sciences. The sociological meaning can be posed under analytic view in reason of the functionalist meaning emerging from the alternative couples status-quo/emancipation and conservatism/progressivism. Through by this perspective, anyway the theme seems not to reveal much more, because this “proteiform complex body” manifest itself as something too much complex in its inner core to be considered in a way or in another. What remains is strictly symbolic, with some theological and eschatological points that refuse to be posed under restrain.

Masonry; Freemasonry; Rosicrucians; Enlightenment; secret; society, Francmaçonnerie; Charbonnerie; Carboneria; Alta Vendita; Stuart; Scottish; Templar; révolution; restauration; Lumières; philosophy; Egalité; Fraternité;

View complete reference list, click here