Martinez (Martinès) de Pasqually (whose full name was Jacques de Livron Joachim de la Tour de la Casa Martinès de Pasqually) was influential at a seminal period in the development of eighteenth century Masonic theosophy. His doctrine of reintegration – that of restoring the pre-eminent powers lost to man at his Fall – influenced Martinism and through it continues to be of importance today. Pasqually was born in Grenoble most  around 1727 and he died in Saint- Domingue (modern day Haiti) in 1774. He is noted for establishing the l'Ordre des Chevaliers Maçons Élus Coëns de l'Univers (the Order of Knight-Masons Elect Priests of the Universe) in 1767. Many of his doctrines are set out in his Traite sur la reintegration des etres dans leur premiere propriete, vertu et puissance spirituelle divine (The Treatise on the Reintegration of Beings). Other sources are contained in the missives and directions he wrote as well as in the handwritten notes of meetings of adepts held at Lyons in the mid-1770s. These teachings are reflected in some of the material in The Lessons of Lyons written by several of his adepts from January 1774 – October 1776. The Lessons are composed of  over one hundred notes taken in preparation for or during their twice weekly meetings. There is a further collection of eight undated notes composed entirely by Willermoz on specific theosophical teachings, and three undated extracts of four of the lessons written by Saint-Martin. As far as I am aware, the Lessons have not been printed in English and my source is taken from the French transcripts published by Robert Amadou in Les Lecons de Lyon Aux Élus Coëns (1999). Amadou advises that there are two primary original sources for the Lessons. The first is a manuscript kept at the Lyons Municipal Library written mainly in the hand of Willermoz. The second is within the source of materials derived from Saint-Martin's papers.

Pasqually taught that man retained vestiges of the original, elevated powers he held before the Fall. He claimed that this allowed for the possibility of man's restoration through the assistance of manifested of Divine Energies. He is also likely to have believed in the transmission of certain, inherent psychic powers within the bloodline and which is the concern of this paper. Anecdotal evidence for this is chiefly contained in Pasqually's appointment of his infant son as the titular head of the Élus Coëns Order mere days after his birth in 1768. On Pasqually's death in 1774, his six year old son, who was unable to exercise the “Active Key” of his father (as Louis Claude de Saint-Martin described Pasquall'y's powers) succeeded his father under a succession of Deputy Grand Masters. What then, was the Active Key of Pasqually and how did he describe this power if it was transmissible? In attempting to answer these questions I have drawn primarily on Pasqually's Treatise as well as some facts from his own life.

In order to fully understand Pasqually's views of the Adamic powers he believed were transmissible, it is necessary to understand his doctrine of the Original State and Work of the Archetypal Man. Pasqually sets out a cosmogony wherein, before time existed, God (“the Creator”) emanated from within his divine immensity independent spiritual beings who were intended to operate “a cult” prescribed to them through eternal laws.4 Some of these beings subsequently “prevaricated” against the Creator, having conceived in their will a belief that they were his equal and desired to create life subject to their own laws. This ill will towards God is what Pasqually termed “the principle of spiritual evil.”

The response of God was to create the material universe – and time itself- as a prison to contain these demonic spirits. Pasqually would write: “the Creator used the force of law upon His immutability by creating this physical universe, apparently of material form, to be the fixed site where those perverse spirits had to act and exert in privation all their malice.”5 The story could have ended there. However, God desired the restoration of these fallen evil spirits to their first estate. To achieve this he emanated Adam, the archetypal man (whom Pasqually termed “the minor spiritual being” (in the sense of his coming into existence later than the first emanated spirits). Adam enjoyed the same virtue and powers as the first emanated beings. However he was “their superior and their elder, by his state of glory and the force of command he received from the Creator.” Man was originally clothed in an immutable and “glorious form” and held command over the created universe for the express purposes of punishing the demonic spirits and of subsequently restoring them to the love of God. These then were the powers required for the Original Work of the Archetypal Man, Adam (Adam Kadmon) who was to operate a cult of spiritual operations to exorcise the evil spirits and lead them from their incarceration in Malkuth for the purpose of restoring the demonic spirits to their first estate in the higher dimensions.

However, Adam “reflected” on the powers he was given and became susceptible to the same temptations of the evil principle that had caused the first emanated spirits to fall. Adam's sin meant that man he was no longer able to penetrate the material universe or hold dominion over it. As a consequence, the original, unblemished and incorruptible state of man became trapped in its present material form, subject to time, decay and suffering in Malkuth. In the words of A.E. Waite, Adam fell “…into the abysses of that earth whence came the fruit of his prevarication. The path of his redemption is now that of the life in Christ.” (The Secret Tradition in Freemasonry, Vol. II, Wait, A.E., London 1911) The path to reintegration was made possible through the Archetype, the Repairer - Christ. To explain how the powers emanating from Christ make this task possible, Pasqually explains that there are two lineages of humanity; the descendants of Cain and the descendants of Seth. The figure of Enoch was important to Pasqually's cosmogony as well, as we shall see.

To understand Pasqually's position on the reconciliation of man with God in Christ, we need to look at the interpretation he gives in the Treatise of Adam's “perfect reconciliation” through his second born son Abel (the child of peace who was “elevated above every spiritual sense”). Adam, who had experienced both good and evil, tried to redeem his first born son Cain, by encouraging him to emulate the spiritual functions of Abel. This son had been conceived differently to Adam's first born, by “a pure conception without the participation of their material senses.” It was as the “root of salvation” that Abel operated a cult of spiritual work that ultimately redeemed Adam while he was in the lowest state of rejection. Cain however persevered in the principle of spiritual evil and “offered as sacrifice the form and life of Abel to the prince of demons.” Abel had no children of his own due to his murder by Cain; however the descendants of Seth (Adam's third son) were born after Adam's reconciliation and while not conceived by a spiritual operation, they nonetheless had inherent psychic powers from the reintegrated Adam. The descendants of Cain lacked these conspicuous gifts. Later would come Enoch, the seventh generation from of the lineage of Seth, who “walked with God, and appeared no more, for God raised him up.” (Gen. 5:24). As such, Enoch was the only man prior to the Incarnation of Jesus Christ who had been reintegrated into the original Edenic state by his ascension. Whatever powers, energies and operations Enoch operated, they were acceptable to God. Therefore, we see in Pasqually's teachings that there was more than one successful attempt at reintegration in history.

The Incarnation, however, would be the final and most powerful of God's operations in the material realm of Malkuth. Through it the Divine Energies and Powers would be granted to the descendants of a marked priesthood to undertake the process of reintegration of mankind. Pasqually would write:

“…the Christ has reconciliated with God the Father only those who have been marked by the seal of the spiritual operation of the righteous. This seal was visibly sent to them without mystery about the way they would have to use it on behalf of those who ought to receive it so that they can be more fortified in the faith and the mercifulness of the Creator, and also to be able to sustain with invincible strength the powerful manifestation of the divine justice which ought to be operated in front of them by the Christ among all the inhabitants of the earth living in divine privation.”  

Pasqually developed theurgic rituals and observances based on this conviction that the bloodline of Seth (from whom he believed he was descended) retained vestiges of the psychic powers derived from the reintegration of Adam. This of course had been demonstrated already in the salvation of Enoch. What Pasqually subsequently sought to achieve, by utilising these esoteric transmitted powers, was the full restoration of humanity's original powers and obligations as they existed prior to the Fall. However, as we learn from the teachings of his adepts in the Lessons of Lyons, while the first work or duty of man was to labour for reconciliation, humanity is mortally hindered because of the material body, which constitutes the chief source of sufferings and keeps us in a state of privation. The means of escape are via a battery of powers conferred by Christ. (Cited from a transcript radio broadcast made by Robert Amadou, March 4, 2000)

Non-Christian occult commentators have ascribed the materialised being invoked by Pasqually's operations as that of Enoch, the Archetype. Others to a powerful Angelic being. However, in Pasqually's theosophy it is the Divine Energy of the ascended Christ who empowers the “saint patriarchs” marked out by God (the descendants of the lineage of Seth) to return to man his original psychic gifts, thereby reintegrating each individual human soul. This is achieved through theurgic operations invoking Christ. Pasqually termed this manifestation as La Chose (“the Thing”). The Thing, we are told, was not the person but the Presence of Christ. When considering the purpose of this manifestation and who should perform it, it needs to be remembered that Pasqually was a Christian and further, that he demanded his adepts be practising Catholics. Pasqually's cult was not a restitution of the operations of the priest-king of the universe, Adam. Neither was it a reconstruction of the cults of the Patriarchs. Waite, suspicious of theurgy, considered Pasqually's rites hard to distinguish “from the typical grimoire of magic” (notably the Key of Solomon or the Legamaton with little or no difference between them aside from minor variations). However, while Pasqually's methods and presumably his sources did not materially differ from the grimoires, Waite concedes that the object was of “a far more exalted order, and was nothing, less than attempt to communicate with the Active and Intelligent Cause.” For his part, Saint-Martin confided reservations about the practice of theurgy to Pasqually. Indeed, he was ultimately to reject magic altogether in favour of the inward, contemplative life of reintegration. He once asked Pasqually: “Master, can all these things be needed to find God?” Pasqually's response to him was “We must even be content with what we have.”

Is there any evidence that Pasqually understood these conspicuous gifts and the seal of the saint patriarchs to be contained in his bloodline? The remainder of this paper is dedicated to exploring that possibility. There is no extrinsic evidence that Pasqually claimed descent from the kohens or priests of the Temple era, although he may well have had Jewish, specifically Sephardic, ancestry. His contemporary Willermoz did not agree that Pasqually was of Jewish heritage. We know Pasqually had some knowledge of the kabbalah but generally speaking his theosophy did not rely on it and Jewish mysticism does not significantly feature in his teachings. There is however anecdotal evidence of his Jewish ancestry in the effort he undertook to obtain a Certificate of Catholicism following the birth of his first born son.

Pasqually was the son of old Don Martinez Pasqualis (b. circa 1671 and probably in his mid-fifties), of Bordeaux and whose origins were Iberian. His father claimed to hold a legitimate Masonic patent delivered to him by the Old Pretender, James III. However, the name of the King is that of Charles III, who did not ascend to the pretence until his father's death in  1766.  Army certificates attest to his son and brother having served in the Regiment of Edinburgh Dragoons until at least 1747. The patent is dated 20th May 1738, and so is questionable as to its provenance.  It granted Pasqually senior the rank of Deputy Grand Master with “the power to erect temples to the glory of the Grand Architect.” Interestingly, this patent was transmissible at death to his son, Pasqually. Willermoz alludes to this when he wrote that Pasqually “had succeeded his father.”  Martinez was raised as a Master Mason at Montpellier in 1754 and is believed to have been actively involved in the Juges Ecossais Chapter. It may be to this chapter that the Masonic patent relates. At some point in 1760 Pasqually's Regiment du Foix–Infanterie arrived home from a tour in Saint-Domingue and he began attending lodges, presenting to them a hieroglyphical chart conferring on him the status of an officer of the Juges Ecossais. In 1765 spent several months' leave with the Augustinian Friars on the Quai de la Seine, Paris, where he met and recruited the nephew of the Grand Prior, the Abbe Fournie, into the Élus Coëns.

Martinez de Pasqually had at least two sons, the youngest of whom died in his infancy in 1770. His eldest son would later, in post-revolutionary France, refer to himself simply as Jacques La Tour. This son was born in June 1768 and baptised at the church of Sainte-Croix, on 24 June of that year. (History and Origins of Martinism: Martinez de Pasqually & The Knight Elect Cohens of the Universe, Ambelain, R. (article)). Pasqually declared him to be his successor as Grand Souverain de l'Ordre. Pasqually and, as mentioned, applied for a Certificate of Catholicism at this time, which suggests a possible Jewish converso antecedence (and indeed Bordeaux had a thriving community of Jewish merchant families). He arranged for his surviving, eldest, son to be educated at the College Lescar near Pau. While in Paris he was accompanied by his fellow officers Bacon de la Chevalerie and Pierre André de Grainville and on the vernal equinox of March 21 1767 Pasqually established the Sovereign Tribunal of the Élus Cohen, with de la Chevalerie as his Deputy.15 Willermoz was initiated shortly afterwards, in May 1767 at Versailles.

On May 5, 1772 Pasqually set sail for Saint-Domingue. There he established the Élus Coëns temple de Port-au-Prince et de Lèogane, which functioned at least until 1780. Any vestiges of it were swept away in the Haitian Revolution. Pasqually died (possibly from yellow fever) in Port-au-Prince on 21 September, 1774. Before his death he appointed a member of his family, his cousin Armand Caignet de Lestere, superintendent-general of the Admiralty at Port-au- Prince, as acting Grand Master of the Order. De Lestere focussed his efforts on the temple at Port-au-Prince and died in Saint-Domingue, four years later on 11 December, 1778. Before his death (also from fever), De Lestere in turn nominated Pasqually's kinsman Sebastian de Las Casas as the Order's Titular Deputy. De Lestere would write to the temples in France that Las Casa was “a very Powerful Master” and further that he had “transmitted his powers to him.” This is of course quite telling, as is the fact that Las Casas is also credited as being a member of Pasqually's family. By 1780 Las Casas began to disband the Order. Perhaps, given the Titular Grand Master's young age (who was 12), there was no one else in the family for Las Casas to nominate for its governance. One may surmise that, at the point, Las Casas had determined to write to the Coën temples telling them to look to their own devices and delivered the archives to the order of the Philalèthes.

The political conditions in post revolutionary France ensured any intention to progress the work of his father were prohibited. He also lost his mentor following the departure of the Abbe Fournie, who had taken on responsibility for the boy's education following Pasqually's death. Why had the Abbe taken on that role? We can only surmise., but I suspect for magical training.  In any event, the Terror meant that the family's nobility would have been perceived as dangerous and the simplification of Pasqually's son's name to simple Jacques La Tour points to this this conclusion. What are we to make of this? There is, firstly, the mysterious role of Pasqually's father as his teacher, also that of a mysterious uncle. A. E. Waite states in his seminal biography of Louis Claude Saint-Martin that “The possibility…remains that Martinès de Pasqually acted under the direction of an anterior Order, namely, the Rosicrucian, with whom he claimed an affiliation. When he first appeared in Paris it was in his capacity as a member of that mysterious brotherhood. Was this an honest claim? We can only decide this question indirectly.”  Pasqually himself spoke of “teachers and faithful friends” from whom he had received instruction. Papus eludes to Swedenborg as among them. Whatever we make of it, if we are minded to consider the plausibility of the transmission of archetypal magical powers within Pasqually's bloodline, then an intriguing thought is whether he has any lineal descendants alive today. We now know that Jacques La Tour was alive and living in France in 1830. He was by then living through the July Monarchy. What is certain is that Pasqually's son was swept along in the Age of Revolution and his survival was no mere happenchance.

M.R. Osborne

December, 2017