France-Spiritualités: Hello, Serge Caillet, and thank you for granting us this interview. We'll begin with a question that appears to be simple. How would you define Martinism, in a few words?
Serge Caillet: The word "Martinism" can be used in several different ways. First, it refers to the doctrine and the Masonic-theurgic system of Martines de Pasqually (~1710-1774). Then it refers to the theosophy specific to his most intelligent disciple, Louis-Claude de Saint-Martin (1743-1803). But it also refers to the Rectified Scottish
Rite (R.S.R.), that specifically Masonic regime devised by Jean-Baptiste Willermoz (1730-1824), another disciple of Martines de Pasqually, who communicated to him the doctrine of reintegration. Finally, one can use the word "Martinism" in a broader sense, as defined by Papus, Dr. Gérard Encausse (1865-1916)–in the sense of the actual Martinist Order which Papus founded at the end of the 19th century under the posthumous patronage of Saint-Martin. And, finally, Martinists are all those who follow the path suggested and shown by Louis-Claude de Saint-Martin, outside of any social framework.
France-Spiritualités: What does being a Martinist mean to you at the present time?
Serge Caillet: It can have the same meaning, or–and this is how it is generally understood–it can mean belonging to one of today's Martinist Orders, and God knows that there are a lot of them! All of which offers some very broad possibilities to those who are interested in this path.
One can also be a Martinist by following the Masonic path of the Rectified Scottish
Rite, or, yet again, as a posthumous disciple of Martines de Pasqually, by adhering to one or another of today's Coën circles, since the Ordre des Elus Coëns (the Order of the Elected Priests), after having been put to sleep at the end of the 18th or the beginning of the 19th century, has been re-awakened. Finally, one can be a Martinist by reading and following Saint-Martin, and by praying with him, without necessarily belonging to a formal Martinist school. To be a Martinist means, above all–and this is the fundamental importance of the schools and the rites–the adhesion to a tradition which, in its modern formulation, comes from Martines de Pasqually and from Louis-Claude de Saint-Martin, but which is, in fact, much older, since it involves nothing less than the primitive Judeo-Christianity. Every Martinist is a Judeo-Christian, and a theosophist. I use this last word in its ancient meaning: a friend of God and of Wisdom.
France-Spiritualités: Today, among the various existing Martinist movements, can one find Martinism as it was practiced originally?
Serge Caillet: The original Martinism, the primitive Martinism, is Martinezism–that is, the system, the doctrine and the theurgy proper to the Ordre des Elus Coëns (the Order of the Elected Priests), or, rather, to the Ordre des Chevaliers Maçons Elus Coëns de l'Univers (the Order of the Knight-Masons Elected Priests of the Universe), to use the exact and complete name of the Order founded by Martines de Pasqually. The question, then, would be: can one be
an Elu Coën today, although the ritual filiation of this Order was lost in the 19th century? In 1942-43, there was a resurgence of the Ordre des Elus Coëns, which I personally consider to be perfectly authentic, by virtue of
an efficacious spiritual filiation. This resurgence gave birth to a certain number of circles which claim to form modern Elus Coëns. One can, therefore, be
an Elu Coën today in the modern world; for me, that is not contradictory. The Tradition is one throughout time, and even if its forms sometimes evolve, I continue to think that the form that Martinism–or Martinezism–took in the 18th century still remains valid and valuable today, for some. But not all Martinists are called to follow the Coën path–far from it! I feel I must insist on this point: the Coën path is narrow, and that means that it is reserved for those for whom it is a vocation. Ceremonial theurgy, because of the rules of life which it involves, requires a veritable consecration to the sacerdotal function.
But primitive Martinism is also that of Louis-Claude de Saint-Martin, isn't it? Saint-Martin did not disagree with Martines on the doctrine, but on the practice. The person who studies Saint-Martin, reads the Scriptures, and prays like Saint-Martin today, while committing himself to
an internal theurgic practice–the path of the heart, as Papus said–truly finds the primitive Martinism. As for the rest, he can do it in a social framework–in a Martinist Order, for example–or outside of any established structure.
France-Spiritualités: For you, then, today's Martinist organizations are not exactly in line with the original Martinism, since one finds the latter only in the Ordre des Elus Coëns?
Serge Caillet: It's not that simple. Louis-Claude de Saint-Martin received the doctrine from Martines de Pasqually and strayed from it only on the level of practice, after having followed the Coën path for a number of years. Papus, later on, also claimed to be continuing the work of Louis-Claude de Saint-Martin and to be following his theosophy. Martines de Pasqually's doctrine, continued by Saint-Martin in a certain sense, and then by Papus, is found today, in varying degrees, in present-day Martinist Orders. And one must judge the tree by its
fruit! In the sense that I believe that the orthodoxy or the fidelity to the doctrine is judged by the fidelity of these Orders towards the primitive doctrine of Martines de Pasqually and of Saint-Martin. Some remain faithful, to the letter, to the original teaching, to the original doctrine, and to the practice of one or the other of the two men. Others have strayed away from them. It's up to each person to make his choice.
France-Spiritualités: Do you think that Martinism lends itself to evolution?
Serge Caillet: The doctrine itself is a traditional doctrine. Consequently, the unchangeable foundation cannot evolve; the form, however, can be adapted to the time and the space in which we live. But the doctrine itself is the original doctrine of the great Judeo-Christian Tradition, which has been codified, expressed, and clarified, in varying degrees, for, let's say, 2000 or 3000 years. One can always advance in one's comprehension, in one's interpretation, in one's approach; but the foundation itself is, in my opinion, unchangeable and invariable.
France-Spiritualités : It seems–but this is only a personal opinion–that the operative keys of the rituals have been eliminated in some Martinist organizations. Do you share this feeling, and, if so, to what do you think this is due?
Serge Caillet: First of all, we must specify which operative keys and which organizations we are talking about. Martines de Pasqually developed a certain number of rituals; he drew them up, put the finishing touches on them, and improved them as time went by–even though he had very little time to do this. Then, the "Ordre des Elus Coëns" fell asleep, some time after his death, and, a few decades later, there was no longer any Martinezism in the strict sense. The doctrine is found again with Jean-Baptiste Willermoz, who founds the Rectified Scottish
Rite (R.S.R.)–but only the doctrine. So, here, we no longer have any operative keys in the sense intended by Martines, since Willermoz was careful to get rid of the theurgy. As for Louis-Claude de Saint-Martin, his practice is not ritual, and his theurgy is not ceremonial but internal. Then, Papus, in turn, sets up
an organization; intuitively, he undoubtedly finds certain keys of the Martinist practice–all the while distancing himself considerably, on a practical plane, from what was done during the time of Martines de Pasqually. Papus' keys are found today, undoubtedly, in a manner that is very diverse but still quite faithful, in many present-day Martinist Orders, which have retained their principal symbols: the mask, the cloak, etc. Others have taken pleasure in adding to these a certain number of symbols which were foreign to the primitive Martinism of Papus. As for the operative keys of Martines de Pasqually, the keys of the ceremonial theurgy, they are not found, in principal, in the present-day Martinist Orders, except maybe in those which explicitly take their inspiration from the Coën tradition–and there are few of those. The "Ordre des Elus Coëns" re-awakened by Robert Ambelain (1907-1998) in 1942-43, right in the middle of the German occupation, tried to once again find a certain number of keys. Some were found, by Robert Ambelain or by his successors, and those keys are found in the Orders which are specifically Coën and not in the classic Martinist Orders, which do not have this vocation.
France-Spiritualités: To your knowledge, are all of the initiations and transmissions which have led to the creation of the various Martinist movements in existence today legitimate and acceptable?
Serge Caillet: Outside of the Rectified Scottish
Rite, whose Masonic-Templar filiation has been uninterrupted since the 18th century, one must distinguish two currents. First, the Papusian current–in the strict sense–which, as its name indicates, goes back to Papus, because the ritual initiation said to be "from Louis-Claude de Saint-Martin", which is conferred by all of the Martinist Orders–let's state this clearly–does not go back to Louis-Claude de Saint-Martin. Papus is at its origin, and–contrary to what is said and to what may still be written–there is no ritual filiation between Saint-Martin and Papus. Papus, undoubtedly intuitively, once again, found certain keys. He had, he said, the "virus" of initiatic organizations, and he founded
an initiatic organization, which, moreover, appears to me to be one of the jewels of esotericism at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century. So there is that initiation which goes back to Papus. In a regular or constant manner, it is, I believe, transmitted in all of the Martinist Orders, which, in some way, still go back to the primitive Martinist Order of Papus. It is also transmitted outside of any initiatic order, from initiator to initiate, just as validly. This is what is called free Martinism, to which Papus originally attached great importance.
And then, parallel with that filiation, or sometimes superimposing itself upon it, there is the filiation that one could call the "neo-Coëns". Again, Martines de Pasqually died in 1774; he had a few immediate successors, but the filiation was interrupted. It was necessary to wait until 1942-43, as I said earlier, when Robert Ambelain, by virtue of a spiritual filiation–which is not a direct ritual filiation–re-awakened the Ordre des Elus Coëns.
Thus, to review, the Martinists, in the Papusian sense of the term, have
an authentic filiation which goes back to Papus; the neo-Coëns, on their side, have a filiation which goes back to Robert Ambelain. But this does not exclude, for either one or the other, a spiritual filiation permitting a veritable and authentic attachment to Saint-Martin or to the Ordre des Elus Coëns of Martines de Pasqually.
France-Spiritualités: In fact, this involves an attachment to an egregore or to a certain tradition more than it involves a veritable transmission.
Serge Caillet: The word "egregore" is ambiguous; therefore, I prefer to speak of the spiritual reality of the Order. But it definitely does involve a veritable transmission, because the Spirit blows where it wants to. Naturally, as the Apostle says, one must examine everything and judge the tree by its
fruit.
France-Spiritualités: Don't you think it would be desirable, if it were possible, to create a sort of inter-obediential "Grand College of Martinist Rites" in order to avoid the deviations of certain forms of Martinism?
Serge Caillet: First of all, would that be desirable? Yes, without a doubt. Would it be possible? I don't think so. That aside, this idea is not
an original idea inasmuch as it was, precisely, the project of Jean-Baptiste Willermoz when he instituted the Grand Profession. Jean-Baptiste Willermoz, recovering the doctrine of Martines de Pasqually, and transferring it to the Rectified Scottish Rite–that is, to the Strict Templar Observance which he had inherited elsewhere–decided to set up two secret conservatory classes, which are called the "Profession" and the "Grand Profession", and which themselves crown the Order of the Knights Beneficent of the Holy City, which is the internal Order of the Rectified Scottish
Rite. That filiation has been uninterrupted since the end of the 18th century. The Professed Knights and the Grand Professed Knights have the function of conserving the purest tradition, or, in any case, the purest doctrine, of Martinism or Martinezism. Therefore, this grand college exists, but it does not appear in secular history, or even, for many, in the history of the initiatic societies.
Today, and in
an entirely different category, one may think of some original projects like that of the C.I.R.E.M. (le Centre International de Recherches et d'Etudes Martiniste–the International Center for Martinist Research and Studies) founded by Robert Amadou several years ago, which has the function of conserving the Martinist heritage, of conducting studies and research, etc. And I also think–more modestly, without doubt, and on a plane which may be a little different–of the
Institut Eléazar, which I have been running for about ten years; it, too, has the function of being a conservatory for the doctrine of Martines de Pasqually and a school which teaches this doctrine, outside of the particular Orders.
France-Spiritualités: Along with Robert Amadou and others, you are one of the principal initiators responsible for today's revival of interest in Martinist studies. You have also been collaborating for some time on the well-known quarterly French magazine "L'Initiation", which was founded by Papus. In your opinion, what remains to be done in this domain?
Serge Caillet: The principal initiator–and there are no others–of Martinist studies today is Robert Amadou, who did so many things, explored so many paths, and discovered so many unknown manuscripts by Saint-Martin, which he later published with a critical apparatus that makes each one of his books a masterpiece. To him also do we owe the discovery and the publication of the "
Fonds Z", the definitive edition of the "
Treatise on Reintegration" by Martines de Pasqually (Diffusion Rosicrucienne), and again recently "
Les leçons de Lyon aux Elus Coëns" (Editions Dervy). But there is still so much to do! It is true that the magazine "
L'Initiation"–which was revived by Dr. Philippe Encausse (1906-1984), the son of Papus, and which has continued to appear since 1952–seems to me to be a privileged vector for the Martinist transmission in every sense of the term. There, also, a form of conservation, of upkeep, and of transmission of this tradition can be accomplished through publications of this type. I'm also thinking of
L'Esprit des Choses ("
The Spirit of Things"), which is the publication of the C.I.R.E.M., the
Bulletin de la Société Martines de Pasqually ("
Bulletin of the Martines de Pasqually Society"), or the magazine
Renaissance traditionnelle ("
Traditional Renaissance").
The doctrine of Martines de Pasqually, the doctrine of Saint-Martin, the teaching of Papus, and the history of these organizations deserve to be studied–both by the historian and by the seeker–because the history is what carries the meaning for those of us who are on a quest for the Eternal; and the Martinist Tradition–among very few others, undoubtedly–is
an authentic Tradition in the West. Therefore, there is still a lot to do, for the historians and for the seekers who are striving to be lovers of the Truth. For the historians, improving the knowledge that we have about these movements; many paths still remain to be explored, beginning with those which lead to Martines de Pasqually. And for the seekers, there is still a lot to do in the study and the learning of the doctrine, which is extremely rich. Entire sections of this history and this doctrine must be explored, brought into the light. So the "excavation site" is open.
France-Spiritualités: So you see Martinism as a path of evolution which is entirely separate, and not as a path which is complementary to other paths, such as Freemasonry or Rosicrucianism?
Serge Caillet: As
an initiatic path, whatever form that may take–and we have seen that that form can vary–there is no doubt that it is
an entirely separate path. This path can take different forms. It can–for example, in the Rectified Scottish Rite–take a Masonic form. It can also, in the properly-called Martinist Order or in the Orders which have issued from it, take a form which is not Masonic. Finally, it can, within the framework of the Ordre des Elus Coëns, take a theurgic form. In every case, it involves the same doctrine, even though the practice differs. Therefore, understood in this way, Martinism appears to me to be
an entirely separate initiatic path–which can, moreover, sometimes take a Masonic form, as we have seen.
But isn't the question which one must ask oneself, and which was already being asked at the time of Martines de Pasqually, the following: can one link
an initiatic path together with a religious–not to say
an ecclesiastical–practice? Martines de Pasqually prescribed and recommended the Mass to his disciples. There was even
an oath which required that the Elus Coëns belong to the Roman Catholic Church. A few
Protestant brothers were admitted into the Elus Coëns, but this was extremely rare. Today, I think that we must still ask ourselves whether initiatic paths, all by themselves, are enough for the seekers, or whether it is necessary to belong to the Church, whatever form it may take–or to a Church, let's say. That is another question, but it must at least be asked.
France-Spiritualités: To illustrate your idea, we can recall that many leading esotericists and occultists belonged to one or another of the branches of the Gnostic Church. We'll simply cite, among the best-known, Papus and many of those who moved in his entourage, as well as, closer to our time, Robert Ambelain. But the list is quite long.
Serge Caillet: Indeed, the list is long! Jules Doinel, the founder of the first Gnostic Church–from which come all of today's gnostic churches–had dreamed of a church which would give back to Christianity its gnostic
dimension. But there is
gnosis and then there's
gnosis. Let's not confuse the very holy
gnosis which, as Clement of Alexandria said, does not oppose faith but perfects it, with the “
gnosis whose name is a lie” denounced by Saint Irenaeus in his treatise against heresies in the 2nd century. Some of today's gnostic chapels, which I refuse to qualify as churches, have committed themselves to this latter path, along the lines of Theodor Reuss and Aleister Crowley, by seizing the title of gnostic church and pretending to possess the apostolic filiation, which could never–thank God!–be transmitted in this way.
Among the occultists who have maintained Doinel's heritage, one must cite at least Jean Bricaud (1881-1934), Constant Chevillon (1880-1944), and, as you said, Robert Ambelain, who were all patriarchs of the Gnostic Church. Doinel's Church did not possess the apostolic filiation, but it was the wish of Providence that his successors should receive it through a line which passes through l'abbé Julio (the Abbot Julio: Julien-Ernest Houssay, 1844-1912). So, we can ask ourselves what the Martinists gathered around Papus, then around his successors at the head of the Martinist Order, were looking for. Wasn't it the one, undivided Church, faithful to the Tradition of the Apostles and the Fathers of the Church, and possessor and dispenser of the
gnosis which Clement of Alexandria speaks of? Now, since its origin, this Church has remained alive in the East, after having disappeared in the West in the Middle Ages, to the advantage of Roman Catholicism. You will have understood that I'm talking about the Orthodox Church, whose providential return in the West allows Martinists today to once again find
an authentic ecclesiastical practice, in parallel with those who follow the practice of the few rare Gnostic Churches worthy of this name, where the faithful are often hardly more numerous than the priests.
France-Spiritualités: In your opinion, what place does Martinism occupy within the Tradition–in the broader sense of this word?
Serge Caillet: Within the Western tradition (I am not qualified to talk about the Eastern Tradition), among the initiatic Traditions, in the exact sense of the word, Martinism is probably–in my eyes, anyway–one of the most eminent Traditions, the one that conveys the current which, theosophically, is the carrier of a fundamental revealed knowledge which is nothing less than the
gnosis of Judeo-Christianity.
France-Spiritualités: Now for the last question in this interview. One cannot really say that Martinism attracts a lot of people today. In your opinion, is it still adapted to the modern world and to what the seekers are looking for?
Serge Caillet: That Martinism does not attract many people is a statement which demands some reflection. By definition, intiatic schools are reserved for a small number of people; that's the way it is. Therefore, we must not be surprised to see that this number is relatively low, even though the research being done by various groups has intensified at the end of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st. Initiatic paths are closed paths and narrow paths.
Is Martinism still adapted to today's world? How could it be otherwise since its tradition leads us into Eternity? The eclipse of Martinism–or, rather, a certain lack of interest in the Martinist Tradition–is not necessarily a sign that this Tradition is outdated. As a matter of fact, I believe that it is the sign that this Tradition is authentic!
France-Spiritualités: Serge Caillet, thank you for your kindness in answering these questions.
