The Secret of the Order of Cosmopolitans By Christoph Martin Wieland

Wikipedia:

The Secret of the Order of Cosmopolitans (German: Das Geheimnis des Kosmopoliten-Ordens) is a treatise published in 1788 by Christoph Martin Wieland, in which he critically examines secret societies and their influence on politics and society. The work is considered an important contribution to the debate on cosmopolitanism and Freemasonry during the Age of Enlightenment. 

In this work, Wieland describes a fictional society, the “Order of Cosmopolitans,” which differs from other secret organizations of the time. While groups such as the Bavarian Illuminati and certain Masonic lodges were known for their secrecy and political influence, Wieland’s order emphasizes openness, reason, and universal humanity.

. . .During its time, the book was seen as a critical reflection on the influence of secret societies on politics and morality. Wieland’s portrayal of cosmopolitanism has been linked to the ideas of Immanuel Kant, particularly his concept of “world citizenship” as part of a rational world order.

Modern scholarly analyses regard the book as a key text in the German debate on cosmopolitanism in the 18th century.

A modern English translation, titled The Secret of the Order of Cosmopolitans, was published in 2025, making the text accessible to a wider audience.

Amazon:

“Such an oath creates a state within a state—especially when conspirators multiply their numbers at will, reaching thousands or even hundreds of thousands.”

Available in English for the first time, this landmark text of the German Enlightenment offers a rare glimpse into the intellectual landscape of 1788. Written by Christoph Martin Wieland, a prominent Freemason of his era, the work sheds light on secret societies, moral dilemmas, and the fragile ideals of the Enlightenment—just on the eve of the French Revolution. Both prophetic and politically relevant, it remains a crucial document for understanding the past and present.

Wikipedia:

Christoph Martin Wieland (5 September 1733 – 20 January 1813) was a German poet and writer, representative of literary Rococo. He is best-remembered for having written the first Bildungsroman (Geschichte des Agathon), as well as the epic Oberon, which formed the basis for both Friederike Sophie Seyler’s opera of the same name and Carl Maria von Weber’s opera of the same name. His thought was representative of the cosmopolitanism of the German Enlightenment, exemplified in his remark: “Only a true cosmopolitan can be a good citizen.” He was a key figure of Weimar Classicism and a collaborator of Abel Seyler’s theatre company. 

. . .More important is the novel Geschichte des Agathon (1766–1767), in which, under the guise of a Greek fiction, Wieland described his own spiritual and intellectual growth. This work, which Lessing recommended as “a novel of classic taste”, marks an epoch in the development of the modern psychological novel. Of equal importance was Wieland’s translation of twenty-two of Shakespeare’s plays into prose (8 vols., 1762–1766); it was the first attempt to present the English poet to the German people in something approaching entirety. 

. . . Politically, Wieland was a moderate liberal who advocated a constitutional monarchy, a free press, and a middle path between extremes of left and right. At least three of his works, Geschichte des Agathon, Der goldene Spiegel oder die Könige van Scheschian, and Beiträge zur geheimen Geschichte des menschlichen Verstandes und Herzens, found themselves on the official Bavarian Illuminati reading list. Wieland also explored the role of secret societies in Enlightenment thought in Das Geheimnis des Kosmopoliten-Ordens (1788). This work examines the political and philosophical implications of clandestine organizations, particularly their potential to form a “state within a state”. A modern English edition, The Secret of the Order of Cosmopolitans, was published in 2025, making the text accessible to a wider audience.

An excerpt from, “The Secret of the Order of Cosmopolitans” Chapter X:

The Cosmopolitans have often been accused of cowardice, weakness, a lack of zeal for the good cause, or even selfish egotism. Indeed, there are people who behave just as they do—out of fear or indifference.

Yet, as an old and true observation states: Two may do the same, and yet it is not the same. Just as a fool may utter foolishly what a wise man expresses wisely, so too may a person of small spirit act from questionable motives in the same way that a noble one acts from higher reasons. 

The true motivation behind the behavior of the Cosmopolitans lies in one of their highest principles:

“That in the moral order of things (as in the physical), all formation, all growth, all progress toward perfection must come about through natural, gentle, and imperceptible motion, nourishment, and development, unfolding moment by moment.”

Any sudden disruption of the balance of forces, any violent method that seeks to achieve in leaps what can only grow slowly according to the natural course of things, carries great dangers. Those who force abrupt change without considering the necessary strength required always risk causing more harm than good. Rapid upheavals driven by one-sided ideas or excessive demands may bring about some good in the short term—yet they destroy so much in the process that, in the end, no one can say whether good or evil has prevailed.

According to cosmopolitan conviction, any progress achieved through forceful and violent means is more apparent than real. In such cases, humanity loses at least as much on one side as it gains on the other. Had reason alone been given the lead, a much greater and more lasting good could have been achieved over a longer period with far fewer sacrifices. Yet even this so-called lost time is no loss at all. For according to the laws of nature, what grows slowly and organically is always more stable and enduring than what is forced into existence by violence.

Moreover, the apparent neutrality that Cosmopolitans maintain in most political conflicts is by no means a sign of indifference toward the good cause. On the contrary—it is precisely their enlightened and orderly zeal for truth and justice that prevents them from openly aligning with any party. Often, the truth does not lie entirely on one side but somewhere between the opposing factions. No warring party is entirely right or entirely wrong. The Cosmopolitans, unclouded by passion or self-interest, recognize this and thereby preserve the freedom to calmly act in ways that truly contribute to the greater good. Their seeming detachment allows them countless opportunities to prevent harm and do good—opportunities they would forfeit if they openly committed themselves to any one side.

However, I see two exceptions in which Cosmopolitans may align themselves with a particular cause.

First: when it is morally certain that their support will decisively tip the balance in favor of justice. 

Second: when one party is clearly suffering injustice and faces suppression without support, or when a side engages in cruelty that violates every human sense of decency. Thus, for example, during the Dutch uprisings under Philip II and his ruthless governor, the Duke of Alba, a Cosmopolitan would have had only one choice—to take a stand against these inhumane oppressors. 

Another example of the first case: if the future representatives of the French nation were to attempt to impose reasonable and state-appropriate limits on the arbitrary power of the king and his ministers, a Cosmopolitan could not hesitate to support their cause to the best of his ability—so long as they remained within the moral boundaries previously outlined.