|
Post by leonardo on Mar 18, 2005 19:58:25 GMT
This question may have been delt with elsewhere but I haven't seen it. Apologies if this is the case.
I was wondering when the first ever Co-Mason lodge was set up, and in which country? Also: What were the first reactions like to such a Lodge?
|
|
|
Post by munkholt on Mar 18, 2005 21:35:40 GMT
From Le Droit Humain: Maria Deraismes was initiated - on 14th January 1882 - into Lodge "Les Libres Penseurs" of Pecq , a small village to the west of Paris. She was the first female Freemason, symbolising initiatory equality.
Eleven years later, on 4th April 1893, Maria Deraismes et Georges Martin, a well known mason, created in Paris the first co-masonic Lodge. Out of this co-masonic Lodge came the birth of the Grande Loge Symbolique Ecossaise "Le Droit Humain", establishing the equality of men and women, out of which, later, came the birth of the International Order of Co-Freemasonry "LE DROIT HUMAIN". But it seems from what I've read that some lodges might have had female members prior to 1717. I would like to know more as well.
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Mar 18, 2005 21:58:38 GMT
Wow! Great response Thomas. Nice work.
I had heard that Lady Donoraile was the first to be initiated in Male Masonry. Seems this was done by accident here in Ireland. From what I recall she was hiding in a wardrobe when she head all that was going on.
I'm sure (hope) someone will set me straight on this.
|
|
|
Post by Hubert (N. Z.) on Mar 18, 2005 22:10:52 GMT
Obviously we are talking aout the "Modern" movement of mixed Freemasonry. Munkholt is correct in the info detailed above. Maria & Georges established the first CoMasonic Lodge , in Paris, under the subtitle of "Le Droit Humain" expressing the French view of Equality, Liberty & Fraternity. The founding of the Order of International Co-Freemasonry was on 11 May 1899, in France and has subsequently spread throughout the world. Annie Besant was charged with establishing the "British Commonwealth" grouping with major centres in India, Australia & New Zealand. Recently (2002) India, New Zealand, & 4 other countries have formed their own Constitution (The Eastern Order of International Co-Freemasonry) to continue the "Beasant" tradition.
I have not reseached further back in history, but beleive that mixed spiritual groups existed, which may in time be discovered to have been early forerunners to "mixed freemasonry"
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Mar 18, 2005 23:05:31 GMT
Thanks Hubert.
Clearly there is far more to this than I first thought. To think that a little over a year ago I never even knew there were Co-Masons and now to learn that there is so much history is brilliant.
|
|
|
Post by ingo on Mar 22, 2005 10:18:27 GMT
That is a good question. The York Document No. 4 from the year 1693 shows that men and women were initiated in non-operative lodges at this time - Grand Lodge of York! So the first country must have been England.
From the year 1656 we have the charge that an EA and FC "has to obey his master, his DAME and other ruling freemasons". In my opinion that says that the masters and their wifes were members of operative lodges.
In 18th century we find a lot of co-masonic lodges in France, Germany, Poland... like the order of the mopses, adoption lodges and other orders. The sisiter of Frederic the Great of Prussia was a famous mops mason...
Like every lodge - men-only, women-only or co-masonic you can find admirers or hate
|
|
|
Post by foxcole on Mar 24, 2005 21:40:37 GMT
Thanks Hubert. Clearly there is far more to this than I first thought. To think that a little over a year ago I never even knew there were Co-Masons and now to learn that there is so much history is brilliant. I'm venturing a little off topic here, but to think that three months ago I never knew there were Co-Masons, and now I am one, is equally amazing.
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Mar 24, 2005 22:27:50 GMT
I'm venturing a little off topic here, but to think that three months ago I never knew there were Co-Masons, and now I am one, is equally amazing. Amen to that Foxcole.
|
|
jmd
Member
fourhares.com
Posts: 1,081
|
Post by jmd on Mar 28, 2005 2:33:23 GMT
Though there appears to be evidence that women were also Freemasons early on, they remain, even with some wording in some early rituals and some early engravings, more circumstantial and perhaps ad hoc. We can of course argue that this will inevitably be a masculine view, this is not, however, to me very important. A question may very well be: were women initiated before Desrasmes? The response by those who will not accept this will inevitably be that if so, they should not have been; or, the evidence is not clear. Still, that site I (and perhaps others too) have previously linked makes good historical reading - Co-Freemasonry. A better question is perhaps whether individuals should be excluded from initiation and participation - whether they have five fingers or less, be of either gender, have pigmentation that is different to the rest of the current group, or have a gigantic nose. Desrames appears to have been the first woman intentionally fully initiated in Les Libres Penseurs. Earlier ones were initiated, if at all, seemingly either to maintain secrecy (of spied ritual) or perhaps maintain benefactor status of family. Certainly the engraving of Elizabeth Aldworth/St Leger seems to give an impression that prehaps this was a common occurance, but I would suggest that an exception does not set the norm. With regards to Ingo's quote of the 1656 charge that the candidate 'has to obey his master, his dame and other ruling freemasons', and despite the grammatical placing of 'other', it may be argued that this was to maintain established social hierarchy, in which a man made Freemason is still required to obey those who were his social superiors outside of the Lodge. An equivalent inclusion of respect towards women in the obligation of the third degree in many Male Craft constitutions does not in the least suggest that women are admitted. The opening question has, of course, already been addressed, and so add my post mainly out of discussion of the 1656 charge, which I personally think is, in comparison to other evidence, a very weak point. In my personal view, there is in any case no need to specifically look for wording that seems to include the feminine, for even in the 1970s, it was clearly said of language that 'he' was gender inclusive (to find any specific reference to 'shee' certainly makes one wonder why it was so written (refering to the York document)!). What is also of historical interest - though of course post-Desrasmes - are, possibly partly as a consequence, the many other Co-Masonic constitutions that arose, including the re-emergence of Memphis-Misraim Primitive rites in Co-Masonic form in Germany via Reuss (prior to his OTO days) and in other places via Steiner.
|
|