Snoek, “Initiating Women in Freemasonry: The Adoption Rite” (reviewed by Kris Wray)

Review
======

Title: Initiating Women in Freemasonry: The Adoption Rite
Author: Jan A. M. Snoek
Publisher: Brill
Genre: Women and Freemasonry; Freemasonry Rituals; Ritual Studies; Feminism
Year Published: 2012
Number of Pages: 550
Binding: Hardback
ISBN 13: 9789004210790
Price: $237.00

Reviewed by Kris Wray for the Association for Mormon Letters

Dr. Jan Snoek’s books are some of the most pertinent and well researched studies available on the meaning and development of Freemasonic rituals. In *Initiating Women in Freemasonry*, he contends that while some females were most likely part of the institution of Freemasonry from a much earlier stage, the inclusion of females into Adoption lodges started no later than 1744 in France. This book was written with an eye to test a theory called Transfer of Ritual, formulated by Snoek and several of his colleagues, which states that when the context of a ritual changes, the ritual itself will probably also be transformed. His detailed analysis of the catechisms he painstakingly collected is impressive, and the extensive knowledge displayed makes it obvious that there is a lot of thought behind the author’s ideas, which he backs up with a vast array of original and rare sources.

Due to prejudice against women being included in the Freemasonic rituals, or ignorance of the existing texts, most works on the subject have unfortunately been biased and far from historically accurate. While elements of the Craft in one form or another predated its attempted consolidation under Grand Lodges during the Eighteenth Century, it was not until the early to mid-1700s that women began participating in Adoption lodges. Focusing primarily on England and France, Snoek compares the evolving ceremonies coming from about 130 manuscripts and publications, giving us deep insight into what female initiates passed through in such lodges. He is successful in his stated purpose of describing their contents, roots and creation, before thoroughly reviewing their development over the past three centuries. The book analyzes the different families of rituals within the Adoption Rites, such as the Clermont, Grand Orient, and Third traditions, and gives an overview of specific inconsistencies, showing how the rituals were adapted to their changing and diverse contexts.

Important texts such as La Franc-Maconne and Le Parfait Macon are dissected as part of *Initiating Women in Freemasonry*’s inspection of the topic, highlighting the power and prestige the fairer sex experienced through their participation in Freemasonry. Adoption lodges such as the Loge de Juste, and others, provide information concerning the rituals in question and the men and women who operated them. Following the Napoleonic era, the lodges which perpetuated the Adoption Rites significantly decreased in popularity. It wasn’t until the late 1800s to the early 1900s that lodges for women began to expand, only to shrink after World War II. More than fifty years ago a group of women Masons, determined to keep the Adoption Rite alive, formed the Cosmos Lodge, which at present remains the only Lodge still utilizing it. On that note, those interested in more recent women’s history will enjoy the section on the Nineteenth Century, which presents documents obtained in the year 2000 which had previously been kept in Moscow since 1945.

My favorite part of the book is the presentation of examples from surviving rituals of the first three degrees of the Adoption Rite, which not only lay out what the women involved were taught, but also the distinct differences between the various ceremonies. Having reviewed the Masonic history of the different countries which fostered Freemasonry in its early years, and the documents pertaining to those areas, Dr. Snoek believes there is a good case to be made that at least some Adoption rites were adapted from the Masonic tradition practiced by men in the Harodim order. The author lists the developments of the rituals alongside the contemporaneous contexts in which they occurred, revealing an obvious divergence in the characteristics of the several families of Adoption ceremonies. In addition, *Initiating Women in Freemasonry* summarizes the sex of the candidates and officers, the evolution from catechetical texts to dramatic performances, and the high degrees and regulations of the Adoption lodges, and discusses the relations between one another.

Included are 38 pages of color photographs dealing with the Adoption Rites, and three separate indices for rituals, names, and subjects; but you really have to appreciate the six appendices containing a table of the Adoption Rite rituals, descriptions of all Eighteenth Century Adoption Rituals in French mentioned within the book, manuscripts of Adoption rituals from the Grand Orient, Clermont, and Brunswick families, and definitions of the various traditions of Adoption rituals.

Students of LDS history, long aware of the obvious connections between Freemasonry and Mormon vernacular and ritual, will find fresh material within Dr. Snoek’s book. Fascinating correlations between the Relief Society for Mormon women and the Temple ordinances, both commenced under the direction of Joseph Smith Jr., are to be made with the Adoption Rites, especially the second degree dealing with Eve and the Garden of Eden. How much, if any, exposure the Mormon Prophet had to the Adoption tradition of Freemasonry is unknown, but it’s likely that other high ranking Mormons, and converts from Europe, would have come in contact with elements of it.

The scholarship on the history of women and the Craft contained within the pages of *Initiating Women in Freemasonry* is some of the best available, although the content is at times technical, so a basic understanding of the material before diving in is helpful. This book has little to criticize, even if one’s conclusions differ from those of Dr. Snoeck’s. My only regret is the price of the book, but if someone is serious about unveiling the mysteries of Freemasonic ritual, or locating possible sources for the inspiration of sacred LDS ceremonies, the research is invaluable, and therefore worth the money.

2 thoughts

  1. Though repositories of Masonic legend sometimes sketch a history of Masonry that goes back to Adam, there are significant limits to the parallels that can be drawn between specific rituals of Masonry and LDS temple ordinances. Of course, French adoption rituals did include a dramatic portrayal of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden), a setting that figures in the book of Moses and the LDS temple endowment. However, despite Michael Homer’s suggestion of the Prophet’s “possible use of adoptive rituals as a model for the endowment” (Joseph’s Temples, p. 252), a cursory reading of the text of the French rites is sufficient evidence to show that the thrust of the ritual is very different from the narrative presented in the LDS temple endowment (see, e.g., the analysis found in J. A. M. Snoek, Initiating Women; J. A. M. Snoek, Freemasonry and Women). Even if a significant similarity between adoptive rituals and the LDS endowment could be argued, I have as of yet seen no evidence beyond conjecture to support the idea that Joseph Smith or his associates encountered descriptions of the French rituals or English exposés of their equivalents (as given in, e.g., A. de Hoyos et al., Light on Masonry, pp. 167-197).

    1. Thank you for your comments Jeff! I agree that one should not come to such a simplistic conclusion as Freemasonry is the sole source of Joseph Smith’s Temple ordinances, for there are significant differences. Nonetheless, as you well know, there are striking parallels, particularly with the first three degrees of men’s blue lodge Masonry. That alone justifies further inquiry into what other elements of Freemasonry could have came across the Prophet’s plate. While I concur that there is no evidence beyond conjecture that Joseph encountered Adoption Masonry, I also don’t think the last word has been said on the subject. It’s regrettable that it has taken many LDS scholars this long to become comfortable with investigating this topic without becoming ultra-apologetic. Freemasonry has a rich background which doesn’t have to be apologized for, so I think it’s a good thing that historians ask questions so we get more answers. Joseph Smith told his loyal contemporaries that the endowment was true Freemasonry restored. That admission forces us to research this avenue further, and Homer’s work is a great step in that direction.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.