“Freemasonry. A traditional perspective”: Trieste hosts a discussion with Natale Mario Di Luca
From the origins of Freemasonry to its relationship with politics, from the initiatic tradition to Italian and European history: the event promoted by the Manlio Cecovini Study Society offered an in-depth exploration of some of the key themes at the heart of Natale Mario di Luca’s book.
A journey through the history of Freemasonry, exploring its origins, its initiatic nature and the transformations that have shaped its development, particularly in Italy. This was the central theme of the meeting with Natale Mario di Luca, held on Friday 18 September at the Trieste headquarters of the Manlio Cecovini Study Society for the Dissemination of Historical, Social and Ethical Studies, on the occasion of the presentation of his book Freemasonry. A Traditional Perspective (La libera muratoria. Una visione tradizionale).
At the heart of Di Luca’s talk was a thesis that runs throughout the book: the need to distinguish Freemasonry understood as an initiatic tradition from the forms it has assumed over the course of history and, in particular, from the political and social role played by certain Masonic organisations from the Napoleonic era onwards.
According to the interpretation put forward by the author, the Napoleonic reorganisation of the Italian peninsula represented a decisive turning point. During this period, a highly centralised model closely linked to the political sphere became established and went on to influence the subsequent development of Italian Freemasonry. Di Luca stressed that this does not mean denying the contribution made by Freemasonry to the Risorgimento and the process of Italian national independence, which he described as fundamental, but rather distinguishing this historical role from the mission that he associates with the Masonic tradition in its proper sense.
This led to a discussion of the very concept of Tradition, understood as the transmission of a heritage that cannot be traced back to a single founder or a specific historical moment. During the meeting, reference was made to some of the oldest documents in the Masonic tradition, beginning with the Regius and Cooke manuscripts, as well as to the symbolic significance attributed to geometry and the building of the Temple. This perspective took the discussion further back in time, to a cultural background shaped by Pythagorean and Platonic thought, Neoplatonism and the encounter between Greco-Roman culture and the Judaeo-Christian tradition.
Considerable attention was also devoted to the origins of modern Freemasonry and the debate surrounding continuity between operative and speculative Masonry. Di Luca noted that, in his view, there is no single answer that can be applied to every European context. While it is possible to argue that the first London Grand Lodge of the eighteenth century represented a break with the ancient guilds of builders, in other contexts – particularly Scotland and Ireland – the available documentation appears to provide clearer evidence of the transition from operative to speculative organisations. The opposition between the so-called Moderns and Antients, and their eventual union in 1813, was also discussed as an example of the complexity of a historical process that cannot easily be reduced to a single line of development.
The discussion then turned to Italian history and the question of continuity between the Grand Orient of Italy of the Napoleonic era and the organisation re-established in the nineteenth century. Di Luca distinguished between the legitimacy of claiming a particular historical heritage and the existence of direct organisational continuity, focusing on the Ausonia Lodge and the history of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite. Here too, the emphasis was on distinguishing interpretations that have become established over time from what can actually be documented through historical sources.
Questions from the audience broadened the discussion further. One of the topics addressed was the relationship between Freemasonry, science and European culture in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, with particular attention to the Royal Society and Isaac Newton. Di Luca pointed out that Newton’s membership of Freemasonry has not been established with certainty, focusing instead on his interest in alchemy, the Kabbalah, astrology and, above all, the study of Solomon’s Temple – aspects of his work that became more clearly understood through manuscripts that emerged and were studied at a later date.
From Newton, the discussion moved on to Giordano Bruno, to whom Di Luca devoted a deliberately critical reflection in relation to interpretations that have portrayed him as a precursor or even a founding reference for Freemasonry. Referring also to the studies of Frances Yates and to the philosopher’s relationship with the earlier Neoplatonic tradition, the author once again invited the audience to distinguish historical evidence from subsequent symbolic and interpretative constructions.
Another significant part of the meeting focused on the relationship between Freemasonry and politics outside Italy. The discussion highlighted how politicisation cannot be regarded as an exclusively Mediterranean phenomenon: the role of military lodges in British expansion, the presence of Freemasonry throughout the Empire and the involvement of local elites were among the issues examined. It was a complex relationship, as the same cultural and political tools acquired within the colonial system were, in some cases, subsequently used in processes of emancipation and independence.
This reflection opened up a further question concerning the idea of a truly universal Freemasonry. From the perspective outlined by Di Luca, its roots remain deeply embedded in European culture and in the Greco-Roman and Judaeo-Christian heritage. Encounters with other religious and initiatic traditions can therefore lead to exchanges and cross-fertilisation, but, according to the author, this does not justify viewing Freemasonry as a kind of universal repository for all esoteric traditions.
In the final part of the event, the discussion also touched upon one of the most controversial chapters in twentieth-century Italian Masonic history: Propaganda Due (P2) and Licio Gelli. Responding to a question from the audience, Di Luca recalled aspects of his own experience within the Grand Orient of Italy, which he joined in 1971, describing the internal climate surrounding the P2 affair and reflecting on the issue of political infiltration. Through his personal recollections, the speaker also conveyed the complexity of a period that profoundly affected the public image of Italian Freemasonry.
The result was a discussion deliberately removed from any linear or celebratory reconstruction. Drawing on history, documents, interpretations and personal testimony, Natale Mario di Luca proposed a return to the sources and a distinction between the initiatic dimension of Freemasonry and the many political, social and cultural roles that Masonic organisations have assumed in different historical periods and different countries.
It is precisely this distinction that lies at the heart of Freemasonry. A Traditional Perspective (La libera muratoria. Una visione tradizionale): a book that seeks to examine Masonic history not only through its best-known political and social manifestations, but also by exploring its cultural, symbolic and initiatic background and comparing different models and experiences.
WATCH THE GALLERY
A journey through the history of Freemasonry, exploring its origins, its initiatic nature and the transformations that have shaped its development, particularly in Italy. This was the central theme of the meeting with Natale Mario di Luca, held on Friday 18 September at the Trieste headquarters of the Manlio Cecovini Study Society for the Dissemination of Historical, Social and Ethical Studies, on the occasion of the presentation of his book Freemasonry. A Traditional Perspective (La libera muratoria. Una visione tradizionale).
At the heart of Di Luca’s talk was a thesis that runs throughout the book: the need to distinguish Freemasonry understood as an initiatic tradition from the forms it has assumed over the course of history and, in particular, from the political and social role played by certain Masonic organisations from the Napoleonic era onwards.
According to the interpretation put forward by the author, the Napoleonic reorganisation of the Italian peninsula represented a decisive turning point. During this period, a highly centralised model closely linked to the political sphere became established and went on to influence the subsequent development of Italian Freemasonry. Di Luca stressed that this does not mean denying the contribution made by Freemasonry to the Risorgimento and the process of Italian national independence, which he described as fundamental, but rather distinguishing this historical role from the mission that he associates with the Masonic tradition in its proper sense.
This led to a discussion of the very concept of Tradition, understood as the transmission of a heritage that cannot be traced back to a single founder or a specific historical moment. During the meeting, reference was made to some of the oldest documents in the Masonic tradition, beginning with the Regius and Cooke manuscripts, as well as to the symbolic significance attributed to geometry and the building of the Temple. This perspective took the discussion further back in time, to a cultural background shaped by Pythagorean and Platonic thought, Neoplatonism and the encounter between Greco-Roman culture and the Judaeo-Christian tradition.
Considerable attention was also devoted to the origins of modern Freemasonry and the debate surrounding continuity between operative and speculative Masonry. Di Luca noted that, in his view, there is no single answer that can be applied to every European context. While it is possible to argue that the first London Grand Lodge of the eighteenth century represented a break with the ancient guilds of builders, in other contexts – particularly Scotland and Ireland – the available documentation appears to provide clearer evidence of the transition from operative to speculative organisations. The opposition between the so-called Moderns and Antients, and their eventual union in 1813, was also discussed as an example of the complexity of a historical process that cannot easily be reduced to a single line of development.
The discussion then turned to Italian history and the question of continuity between the Grand Orient of Italy of the Napoleonic era and the organisation re-established in the nineteenth century. Di Luca distinguished between the legitimacy of claiming a particular historical heritage and the existence of direct organisational continuity, focusing on the Ausonia Lodge and the history of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite. Here too, the emphasis was on distinguishing interpretations that have become established over time from what can actually be documented through historical sources.
Questions from the audience broadened the discussion further. One of the topics addressed was the relationship between Freemasonry, science and European culture in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, with particular attention to the Royal Society and Isaac Newton. Di Luca pointed out that Newton’s membership of Freemasonry has not been established with certainty, focusing instead on his interest in alchemy, the Kabbalah, astrology and, above all, the study of Solomon’s Temple – aspects of his work that became more clearly understood through manuscripts that emerged and were studied at a later date.
From Newton, the discussion moved on to Giordano Bruno, to whom Di Luca devoted a deliberately critical reflection in relation to interpretations that have portrayed him as a precursor or even a founding reference for Freemasonry. Referring also to the studies of Frances Yates and to the philosopher’s relationship with the earlier Neoplatonic tradition, the author once again invited the audience to distinguish historical evidence from subsequent symbolic and interpretative constructions.
Another significant part of the meeting focused on the relationship between Freemasonry and politics outside Italy. The discussion highlighted how politicisation cannot be regarded as an exclusively Mediterranean phenomenon: the role of military lodges in British expansion, the presence of Freemasonry throughout the Empire and the involvement of local elites were among the issues examined. It was a complex relationship, as the same cultural and political tools acquired within the colonial system were, in some cases, subsequently used in processes of emancipation and independence.
This reflection opened up a further question concerning the idea of a truly universal Freemasonry. From the perspective outlined by Di Luca, its roots remain deeply embedded in European culture and in the Greco-Roman and Judaeo-Christian heritage. Encounters with other religious and initiatic traditions can therefore lead to exchanges and cross-fertilisation, but, according to the author, this does not justify viewing Freemasonry as a kind of universal repository for all esoteric traditions.
In the final part of the event, the discussion also touched upon one of the most controversial chapters in twentieth-century Italian Masonic history: Propaganda Due (P2) and Licio Gelli. Responding to a question from the audience, Di Luca recalled aspects of his own experience within the Grand Orient of Italy, which he joined in 1971, describing the internal climate surrounding the P2 affair and reflecting on the issue of political infiltration. Through his personal recollections, the speaker also conveyed the complexity of a period that profoundly affected the public image of Italian Freemasonry.
The result was a discussion deliberately removed from any linear or celebratory reconstruction. Drawing on history, documents, interpretations and personal testimony, Natale Mario di Luca proposed a return to the sources and a distinction between the initiatic dimension of Freemasonry and the many political, social and cultural roles that Masonic organisations have assumed in different historical periods and different countries.
It is precisely this distinction that lies at the heart of Freemasonry. A Traditional Perspective (La libera muratoria. Una visione tradizionale): a book that seeks to examine Masonic history not only through its best-known political and social manifestations, but also by exploring its cultural, symbolic and initiatic background and comparing different models and experiences.
WATCH THE GALLERY
