Just to clarify for Russell.That is a reference to the book by William Huchinson from 1775 not Foster Bailey's later (1957) work which was inspired just as much by theosophy, Tibetan mysteries and universal initiation as it was by Freemasonry.
I have attached (below) my review when I first read it a few years ago:
The Spirit of Masonry, by William Hutchinson (1732 –1814), ISBN 0 517 36604-5, this edition published 1982, 336 pages (incl. Appendix).
This is a reprint of a work originally published under the title The Spirit of Masonry. In Moral And Elucidatory Lectures by Hutchinson in 1775. It also contains Editorial explanations added later by the Rev. Dr. George Oliver (1781 – 1861). The author was a pre-UGLE Freemason (he died the year after the formation of UGLE) which seems to show through in his incredibly Christian take on the Ritual of the Craft. An essential source for anyone interested in exploring the inner mysteries as understood by our 18th century predecessors, rather than relying on authors of modern and more sensationalist works..
The book is formed of lectures written by Hutchinson covering:
the Design; on the Rites, Ceremonies and Institutions of the Ancients; the nature of the Lodge; furniture of the Lodge; the apparel and jewels of Masons; The Temple at Jerusalem; on Geometry; the Master Mason’s Order; the secrecy of Masons; on Charity; on Brotherly Love; on the occupations of Masons; and A Corollary.
The Appendix is also interesting, covering: a charge for the Festival of St. John; address for a voluntary contribution; address to a body of Freemasons; address after the expulsion of a member; a charge by the W.M on leaving the Chair; a charge delivered on the installation of a WM; an address to the newly-installed Officers; an oration at the dedication of a new Masonic Hall, an oration on Masonry, an oration at the dedication of freemason’s Hall, in Sunderland 1778; a letter from Mr Locke to the Earl of Pembroke; an old manuscript on Freemasonry; Remarks on the old manuscript; a vindication of Freemasonry and a lesson for Freemasons
Even the footnotes added by Dr. Oliver George at a much later date are interesting in their own right as well.
In these lectures Hutchinson expressed his view on the origin and story of Freemasonry. He rejected any connection with a previous society such as the operative masons. He also puts in doubt the suggestion that they had secrets or mysteries. He claimed that organised Masonry existed at the Temple of Solomon, and that Solomon knew the principles of Freemasonry. He also believed that Solomon communicated them to "some sage and religious men" of his kingdom. This theory was never really accepted by his peers at the time and it is only now that contemporary authors (rather than masonic historians) are trying to revive it. Most serious Masonic historians consider it to be Hutchinson's theory, and nothing more than interesting. He basically divided the evolution of Freemasonry into three stages represented by the Three Degrees:
The first stage, linked to the Entered Apprentice Degree, began with Adam in the Garden of Eden and ends with the time of Moses. When Adam was expelled he took with him the first-hand "knowledge of the God of Nature," as well as all the sciences and knowledge available at that time. He was able to communicate them to his descendants and this was the foundation of Freemasonry. After the deluge, this knowledge was blurred and it became corrupted into idolatry. The Egyptians, and later on the Greeks and the Romans, hid the mysteries of their religions behind symbols and hieroglyphs understandable only by their priests. Unfortunately, races started to worship the Sun, Moon, and Stars instead of seeing them as representations of God. The masons, as a mean of concealing their mysteries, adopted these methods of teaching by symbols. This first stage consisted in the simple belief and worship of the true God following the doctrine revealed to Adam and transmitted to his descendants by the patriarchs. It was a system of religious principles with few rites and ceremonies, and even less symbols.
The second stage, represented by the Fellow Craft degree, started at the time of Moses and ended with the advent of Christianity. Moses was aware of true Masonry but it was complemented by the instruction God gave to him directly on Mount Sinai. One had now to believe in God. The second stage of Masonry, was Judaic. Moses introduced the rites, ceremonies, symbols, and hieroglyphs used before by the Egyptian priests. Freemasonry was not organised at the time of the Temple of Solomon built by masons of different nationalities including Israelite. However, its building occupies an important place in the history of the Craft. After the completion of the Temple, these Masons were dispersed in the entire world where they taught their art. According to this theory King Solomon was not the founder of Masonry at the Temple, nor its first Grand Master, but he propagated it in the foreign countries.
The third stage began with Christianity, represented by the Master Mason Degree that brings the complete and perfect knowledge of God. Freemasonry assumes then a purely Christian form and Christian interpretation, and the allegory of the Third Degree refers directly to the Christian Master. This “Christianisation” of the Third Degree, with its symbols referring to Christ, was apparently common in the 18th Century. Hutchinson doesn’t mention Hiram Abif whom he did not recognise as a Mason, but as a painter or sculptor. For him, the Third Degree symbolises the corruption and death of religion, and the moral resurrection of man in the new Christian doctrine. To Hutchinson, Hiram Abif's legend was false, and he denied the legend of the Third Degree at the Temple. The Legend, or allegory of Hiram Abif, was unknown then.
Overall Rating: 6/10
Conclusion: an excellent book to read for experienced Masons, giving a fantastic insight into the differences between the Craft today and in the 18th century. It is not difficult to read due to it having been edited at a later date. Lots of interesting philosophies and opinions. However, as with any masonic book of this type, it must be remembered that this was the Author’s opinions about Freemasonry.