rustybones49801
A Rough Ashlar
Are PHA's recognized by your Grand Lodge?
PHA and your GL
- Thread starter rustybones49801
- Start date
rustybones49801
A Rough Ashlar
It's my understanding that 13 GL's do not recognize PHA's yet. I was wondering which ones. Va and Tx are off the list, as well as Mi
Florida, I do believe, does not recognize PHA. I believe it has to do something with their charter status from England, and that they have their own Grand Lodge. I could be wrong. Sadly, our GL website is broken 90% of the time so I cannot find any good info on their website. But this is coming from what I've learned talking with other FL Brothers.
montanatburg
New Member
PHA in Florida
Hi,
I am a freemason from Florida, and the gl of Florida does not recognize PHA of Florida. But, If an out of state PHA comes to Florida and his PHA lodge is recognize by their state gl and florida recognizes that states gl, then that PHA mason can go to any lodge in florida and be accepted. There was one lodge in florida a few years back that did not let in a PHA mason, that lodg is under investigation now.
Hi,
I am a freemason from Florida, and the gl of Florida does not recognize PHA of Florida. But, If an out of state PHA comes to Florida and his PHA lodge is recognize by their state gl and florida recognizes that states gl, then that PHA mason can go to any lodge in florida and be accepted. There was one lodge in florida a few years back that did not let in a PHA mason, that lodg is under investigation now.
Ashlar2006
Masonic Mafia
Not doubting what you are saying , but I can not see how that would work . Can you or Jason , if you have the GL of Fla. constitution , post that section that states this ? I am interested in reading it .
Deadhead Derek
New Member
Oregon Recognizes PHA
montanatburg
New Member
history of prince hall
this was taken from a web clip a found.
EFFCTS OF RECOGNITION OF PRINCE HALL MASONRY
By
M:W: Allen G. Tidwell, P.G.M.
Slidell Lodge No. 311
September 1, 1990
Alexandria, LA
In attempting to foresee the effort of any given course of action, probably it is wise, in the beginning to
determine what are genuine and then work from there.
However, sometimes there is a problem.
For instance, when ore is heated, along with the molten metal is a dross that needs to be
skimmed off and discarded.
So it is with written work. Far too often, in time, added opinion becomes accepted fact.
After 200 years, we find in some quarters our founding fathers are being pictured as
reprobates-unheard of a few years ago.
While he was alive, Brother J. Edgar Hoover was considered the epitome of integrity. He was
trusted by many presidents as well as by his countrymen. Those who wish to destroy what
history will say about the character of this dedicated American already has begun, by
exaggeration and innuendo, their hatchet work.
Countless other examples could be cited.
So too, is the topic this speaker will discuss with you this date.
There have been instances where intelligent men have glossed over, or argued against, facts
and circumstances.
After considering several sources, I believe that you will find the following helpful in your
deliberations.
PRINCE HALL MASONRY: REGULAR OR IRREGULAR?
Subsequent to getting into the effects of recognition of Prince Hall Masonry, I will relate
some of the history and background as pertaining to that particular organization.
The first question you may ask is:
"Just what or who is Prince Hall"?
Prince Hall was a black man born probably in West Africa around 1735 (the date is disputed).
According to one version of the story, Prince Hall, at the age of fourteen, was carried to
America by slave-traders. He was sold as a chattel into the family of William Hall, a leather
dresser of Boston; and his new owners called him "Prince." He worked in that household for
twenty-one years. In 1770, apparently for good behaviour, his owners set him free. He had
learned his former master's trade of leather dresser and was able to earn his livelihood by that
means. On March 6, in either 1775 or 1778 (the date is not clear), he was made a Mason.
Within the next three years, he, along with a number of other black men, formed a Lodge that
they called African Lodge No.1.
Interestingly, Prince Hall was reportedly initiated by a Sergeant John Batt of the British
Army's 38th Regiment of Foot, which was stationed in Boston when the American
Revolution started. There was a regimental Lodge, No.441, I.C. L-Iesus Christus (Jesus
Christ), but it is not known whether Batt belonged or not. Batt was discharged from the
British army in 1777, and promptly joined the rebel forces but deserted the next year. He does
not come across as a man of deep principle. It has been suggested that he was a confidence
man who made quite a bit of money by pretending to initiate some black men into Masonry
for a fee. Quite possibly, the initiation ceremony consisted, as Coil
suggests, of "sales talks, and a copy of one of the published Masonic "exposures. Some
modern students have argued that these black men were really not Masons, because they had
joined in such irregular circumstances.
However, the Grand Lodge of England (Moderns) issued Warrant No.459 to African Lodge
of Boston on September 29, 1784. In 1792 the Grand Lodge changed the Lodge's number to
"370." Because the Lodge failed to comply with the terms of its warrant by not submitting
any annual returns or reports after 1798 and not remitting any Moines for the Grand Charity
Fund since 1797, the United Grand Lodge of England, as the lawful successor to the Grand
Lodge of England (Moderns), did in 1813, EASE African Lodge of Boston from its register
of Lodges. This caused the forfeiting of the 1784 English warrant which became null and
void. As proof of its intent and purpose, the Grand Lodge of England assigned the Lodge
Numbers "370" and "459" to other Lodges.
Thus since 1813 the 1784 English warrant of African Lodge of Boston has been a worthless
scrap of paper devoid of any Masonic authority, validity, force, or effect. Any act, deed, or
effort performed in the name of African Lodge No. 459/370 of Boston since 1813 has been
invalid and ultra virus (beyond the legal power or authority of an organization). Any group of
men, regardless of color, attempting to claim any legitimacy or regularities since 1813 by
virtue of possessing the physical 1784 English warrant of African Lodge of Boston is simply
practising self-deception.
Not having any lawful and competent and regular Masonic authority since 1813, the members
of African Lodge of Boston and ALL bodies claiming descent from it cannot escape the
classification of illegitimate and clandestine. Witness the fact that the United Grand Lodge of
England has not extended any recognition to, nor held any communication with the Prince
Hall Masons for more than 175 years. The United Grand Lodge of England, also, has never
extended any recognition to any of the Prince Hall Grand Lodges in the United States.
Subsequent to October, 1989, recognition of Prince Hall Masonry, in America, had been
considered in only two instances.
Seventeen American Grand Lodges severed relations with the Grand Lodge of the State of
Washington.
The next year, in 1899, the Grand Lodge of the State of Washington reversed its action.
In 1947, the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts recognized Prince Hall Masonry.
At least eleven American Grand Lodges reproached them and the Grand Lodges of Florida
and Texas severed relations with the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts.
Two years later, in 1949, the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts retracted its action.
To date, only 7 regular Grand Lodges in the United States have effectively extended any form
of recognition to any of the Prince Hall Grand Lodges. Those recognition's were effected
between the months of October 1989, and August 1991.
Consequently, regular Masonry throughout the world, (Connecticut, Nebraska, Wisconsin,
Colorado, North Dakota, Minnesota, and the State of Washington not included), consider
ALL Prince Hall Grand Lodges, as well as any other "so-called" Negro Grand Lodges, in the
United States, illegitimate and clandestine.
It's important to note that on June 26, 1827, according to a notice in the Boston Daily
Advertiser, African Lodge declared its independence of any external authority. It began to
call itself African Grand Lodge No.1.
It should also be noted that the words "Prince Hall" were incorporated into their title
following a recommendation made at a conference of Prince Hall Grand Masters held in
Arkansas in 1944.
Note that I have used the term, Negro Grand Lodges, and not "Negro Lodges." There exists in
America, at this date, regular, predominately Negro Lodges. For instance, Alpha Lodge
No.116, located in East Orange, New Jersey, which has approximately 171 members is
governed by the authority of the Grand Lodge of New Jersey, F.&A.M.
Now, I will get back to the original question. How does the recognition of Prince Hall
Masonry by some Grand Jurisdictions, affect regular Masonry?
I now offer for your consideration possible results of recognizing Prince Hall Masonry.
What would be some of the advantages of recognizing this clandestine group?
Well, with Prince Hall recognition, their members may be visiting our constituent Lodges, so we may have more
in attendance at our meetings.
Perhaps they may contribute some of their money to our charities or to our Lodges.
Recently in Massachusetts, a Prince Hall Lodge official successfully fostered the idea of a
brotherhood night with a regular lodge. A dinner followed by speakers was held, with
alternate seating to increase the friendliness of the occasion. Ladies and men of the Prince
Hall Order of the Eastern Star prepared the meal, and ladies of the members of the regular
Lodge assisted in serving. Such social gatherings could be expected to increase.
Masonry has been accused of paying lip service to the Fatherhood of God and the
Brotherhood of Man. Recognition may improve our image.
Recognition would almost certainly be the first step toward union of the two organizations.
Thus, the size of our fraternity may increase.
However, certain negative effects may be felt.
The most obvious observation to the question of recognition is that by recognizing "Prince
Hall Masonry," by decree, is inherently counterproductive. All but seven of our Grand
Jurisdictions acknowledge, for the reasons aforementioned and many others, Prince Hall
Masonry is clandestine, and we are by law and obligation restricted from sitting and/or
communicating with clandestine Masons. When the Grand Lodges of Connecticut, Nebraska,
Wisconsin, Colorado, North Dakota, Minnesota and the State of Washington recognized
clandestine Masons as regular, it put the rest of the Grand Lodges in our Nation in a very
precarious position.
Carl H. Claudy, a great Masonic writer, in describing the importance of the obligation,
indicated even though there would be no light and no building, a man might be made a
Master Mason.
On the other hand, no matter how beautiful the building with every working tool and
convenience at hand, there would be no initiation, passing or raising without the obligation.
Most Masons, although not wilfully, but due to human weakness, sometimes break one or
more sections of their obligation.
If a clandestinely made Mason were to attend your lodge, there no doubt would be guilt on
the part of some of the regular Masons in attendance. Picture in your mind the possible
reactions. Some would leave. Some would be afraid of what the clandestine Mason would
think, so they would suppress their emotions and remain silent - but would never return to
Lodge. Others may even strongly state their feelings and objections.
In any case, the peace and harmony of the Lodge would be seriously disturbed - if the lodge,
in fact, continued to exist.
Another great Masonic writer wrote that no matter that the ritual had been exposed, the
deeper meanings of the symbols and allegories of Masonry would not be comprehended
unless a man had been initiated, passed and raised in a just and legally constituted Lodge of
Masons.
If clandestinely made Masons were to sit in a regular Lodge, the Masonic obligation would be broken and in the
highest sense, the lodge would no longer be legal. This may be a hindrance on the part of the members, and
perhaps especially any candidate, to ever understand deeply the symbols and allegory of Masonry .
Recognition of Prince Hall Masonry would mean that there would be two recognized Grand
Lodges in a given State.
It has been the tradition in the United States to have only one regular Grand Lodge within the
boundary of any one State.
The change in American tradition may involve problems.
Prince Hall Masonry is not recognized as legitimate anywhere in the world, except now in
seven American States.
If regular Masonry is to recognize Prince Hall Masonry, then in justice and fairness the
claims of the Grand Lodges that have broken off from Prince Hall Masonry, and even other
clandestine Grand Lodges, would need to be investigated. They deserve the same
consideration, for we will have set precedence by the earlier recognition.
As regular Masons, we must now, and evermore, remain extremely cautious if we wish to visit a lodge in one of
the seven aforerferenced Grand Jurisdictions for fear that a person who has not been regularly initiated, passed
and raised, may be sitting in that regular lodge. How are we to know? It certainly is not easy to recognize as it
once was.
As you know, the Grand Lodge of Louisiana withdrew recognition of the Grand Lodge of
Connecticut as a safeguard for Louisiana Masons not to be inadvertently subjected to the
possibility of sitting with clandestine Masons. During Masonic year 1990, the Grand Master
took a different posture in dealing with the Grand Lodge of Nebraska, Wisconsin, and the
State of Washington. He authored a "Statement of Position" concerning the aforementioned
Grand Lodges, and it was published in the "Louisiana Freemason," our quarterly Masonic
publication. This was done in an effort to effectively alert Louisiana Masons pertaining to the
actions of the Grand Lodges of Connecticut and Nebraska and to reiterate our responsibilities
to our Masonic obligations and our Masonic Law that both forbid us from sitting and/or
communicating with clandestine Masons.
On February 19, 1991, the United Grand Lodge of England published a statement titled
"Prince Hall Masonry and North American Grand Lodges" that read as follows:
"The Board has considered reports that the Grand Lodges of Connecticut, Wisconsin
and the State of Washington have each recognized the 'Prince Hall' Grand Lodge
operating within its jurisdiction, been recognized by it and have established reciprocal
rights of inter-visitation. This means that members of Masonic constitutions not
recognised by the United Grand Lodge of England may be encountered in Lodges in
North America under Grand Lodges that we at present recognize.
Until further notice, Brethren of the English Constitution should not visit Lodges
under the Grand Lodges named above.
Brethren from recognised Masonic jurisdictions in North America (including the four
named above) continue to be welcome at our meetings. "
The following states effected their recognition of Prince Hall Masonry after the
aforereferenced position paper was written and before the United Grand Lodge of England
paper was made cognisant of the referenced States actions. Those dates are as
follows:
(Wisconsin' s action was effected June 18, 1990.)
(Washington State's action was effected June 19, 1990.)
(Colorado ' s action was effected January 28, 1991.)
(North Dakota's action was effected June 1991.)
(Minnesota' s action was effected August 1991.)
The following definitions are taken from Albert Mackey's "Encyclopaedia of Freemasonry":
Clandestine – The ordinary meaning of this word is secret, hidden. The French word
"clandestine," from which it is derived, is defined to be something
done in a hiding-place and against the laws, which best suits the
Masonic signification, which is illegal, not authorized.
Clandestine Lodge- A body of Masons united in a lodge without the consent of a Grand Lodge, or,
although originally legally constituted, continued to work after its charter has been
revoked, is styled a "Clandestine Lodge. "
Clandestine Mason- One made in or affiliated with a clandestine Lodge. With clandestine
Lodges or
Masons, regular Masons and forbidden to associate or converse on
Masonic subjects.
Using Mackey's definitions, it seems clear to me that the only way a man can become a
regular Mason and sit in a Lodge of regular Masons is to be initiated, passed and raised in a
regular Lodge as each of us was. It seems absolutely absurd to view it in any other way.
The Grand Lodge of West Virginia obviously has similar convictions. Their Grand Master for
1991, M: W : Charles E. Forsythe, applaudably has issued two Edicts dealing with the
subject. His Edicts FORBID members of the Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of West
Virginia, A.F.&.A.M., to be present in Lodges under the Grand Lodges of Connecticut,
Wisconsin, Nebraska, State of Washington, Colorado, Minnesota, and North Dakota. His
Edicts DO NOT prohibit members of those named jurisdictions from visiting Lodges under
the jurisdiction of the Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of West Virginia, A.F.&A.M. His show
of strength and concern for Masonic heritage and integrity when dealing with this
controversial and sensitive matter is commendable
In summary, it is my opinion, that the ideal of recognizing clandestine Masonry is ill
conceived and is inherently divisional in its effects toward regular Freemasonry. In these
present times, as we suffer through a period of attitude apathy and lack of interest in the
moral teachings of our fraternity, I repetitiously state that to intentionally cause a division in
our Masonic fraternity is counterproductive and produces absolutely no merit whatsoever.
These should be times, as never before in our existence, for all regular Masons to be pulling
together toward a common cause. The actions taken by the Grand Lodges of Connecticut,
Nebraska, Wisconsin, Colorado, North Dakota, Minnesota and the State of Washington,
relative to recognizing Prince Hall Masonry as legitimate is contrary to a desired goal of
working together, as regular Masons, toward a common cause. This carries with it an
escalated and distinct possibility of causing an irreparable split in Freemasonry in North
America.
INFORMATON SAURCES
"A Problem For The 90's -Prince Hall Freemasonry And The Question of Regularity"
Wallace McLeod, FPS, International Vice-President, The Philalethes Society.
"Important For Regular Masons"
Prepared by Masonic Research Associates, Anchorage, Alaska.
"Foreign Countries"
Carl H. Claudy, Southern Ppublishers, Inc., Masonic Publications Division, Kingsport, Tennessee.
1
this was taken from a web clip a found.
EFFCTS OF RECOGNITION OF PRINCE HALL MASONRY
By
M:W: Allen G. Tidwell, P.G.M.
Slidell Lodge No. 311
September 1, 1990
Alexandria, LA
In attempting to foresee the effort of any given course of action, probably it is wise, in the beginning to
determine what are genuine and then work from there.
However, sometimes there is a problem.
For instance, when ore is heated, along with the molten metal is a dross that needs to be
skimmed off and discarded.
So it is with written work. Far too often, in time, added opinion becomes accepted fact.
After 200 years, we find in some quarters our founding fathers are being pictured as
reprobates-unheard of a few years ago.
While he was alive, Brother J. Edgar Hoover was considered the epitome of integrity. He was
trusted by many presidents as well as by his countrymen. Those who wish to destroy what
history will say about the character of this dedicated American already has begun, by
exaggeration and innuendo, their hatchet work.
Countless other examples could be cited.
So too, is the topic this speaker will discuss with you this date.
There have been instances where intelligent men have glossed over, or argued against, facts
and circumstances.
After considering several sources, I believe that you will find the following helpful in your
deliberations.
PRINCE HALL MASONRY: REGULAR OR IRREGULAR?
Subsequent to getting into the effects of recognition of Prince Hall Masonry, I will relate
some of the history and background as pertaining to that particular organization.
The first question you may ask is:
"Just what or who is Prince Hall"?
Prince Hall was a black man born probably in West Africa around 1735 (the date is disputed).
According to one version of the story, Prince Hall, at the age of fourteen, was carried to
America by slave-traders. He was sold as a chattel into the family of William Hall, a leather
dresser of Boston; and his new owners called him "Prince." He worked in that household for
twenty-one years. In 1770, apparently for good behaviour, his owners set him free. He had
learned his former master's trade of leather dresser and was able to earn his livelihood by that
means. On March 6, in either 1775 or 1778 (the date is not clear), he was made a Mason.
Within the next three years, he, along with a number of other black men, formed a Lodge that
they called African Lodge No.1.
Interestingly, Prince Hall was reportedly initiated by a Sergeant John Batt of the British
Army's 38th Regiment of Foot, which was stationed in Boston when the American
Revolution started. There was a regimental Lodge, No.441, I.C. L-Iesus Christus (Jesus
Christ), but it is not known whether Batt belonged or not. Batt was discharged from the
British army in 1777, and promptly joined the rebel forces but deserted the next year. He does
not come across as a man of deep principle. It has been suggested that he was a confidence
man who made quite a bit of money by pretending to initiate some black men into Masonry
for a fee. Quite possibly, the initiation ceremony consisted, as Coil
suggests, of "sales talks, and a copy of one of the published Masonic "exposures. Some
modern students have argued that these black men were really not Masons, because they had
joined in such irregular circumstances.
However, the Grand Lodge of England (Moderns) issued Warrant No.459 to African Lodge
of Boston on September 29, 1784. In 1792 the Grand Lodge changed the Lodge's number to
"370." Because the Lodge failed to comply with the terms of its warrant by not submitting
any annual returns or reports after 1798 and not remitting any Moines for the Grand Charity
Fund since 1797, the United Grand Lodge of England, as the lawful successor to the Grand
Lodge of England (Moderns), did in 1813, EASE African Lodge of Boston from its register
of Lodges. This caused the forfeiting of the 1784 English warrant which became null and
void. As proof of its intent and purpose, the Grand Lodge of England assigned the Lodge
Numbers "370" and "459" to other Lodges.
Thus since 1813 the 1784 English warrant of African Lodge of Boston has been a worthless
scrap of paper devoid of any Masonic authority, validity, force, or effect. Any act, deed, or
effort performed in the name of African Lodge No. 459/370 of Boston since 1813 has been
invalid and ultra virus (beyond the legal power or authority of an organization). Any group of
men, regardless of color, attempting to claim any legitimacy or regularities since 1813 by
virtue of possessing the physical 1784 English warrant of African Lodge of Boston is simply
practising self-deception.
Not having any lawful and competent and regular Masonic authority since 1813, the members
of African Lodge of Boston and ALL bodies claiming descent from it cannot escape the
classification of illegitimate and clandestine. Witness the fact that the United Grand Lodge of
England has not extended any recognition to, nor held any communication with the Prince
Hall Masons for more than 175 years. The United Grand Lodge of England, also, has never
extended any recognition to any of the Prince Hall Grand Lodges in the United States.
Subsequent to October, 1989, recognition of Prince Hall Masonry, in America, had been
considered in only two instances.
Seventeen American Grand Lodges severed relations with the Grand Lodge of the State of
Washington.
The next year, in 1899, the Grand Lodge of the State of Washington reversed its action.
In 1947, the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts recognized Prince Hall Masonry.
At least eleven American Grand Lodges reproached them and the Grand Lodges of Florida
and Texas severed relations with the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts.
Two years later, in 1949, the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts retracted its action.
To date, only 7 regular Grand Lodges in the United States have effectively extended any form
of recognition to any of the Prince Hall Grand Lodges. Those recognition's were effected
between the months of October 1989, and August 1991.
Consequently, regular Masonry throughout the world, (Connecticut, Nebraska, Wisconsin,
Colorado, North Dakota, Minnesota, and the State of Washington not included), consider
ALL Prince Hall Grand Lodges, as well as any other "so-called" Negro Grand Lodges, in the
United States, illegitimate and clandestine.
It's important to note that on June 26, 1827, according to a notice in the Boston Daily
Advertiser, African Lodge declared its independence of any external authority. It began to
call itself African Grand Lodge No.1.
It should also be noted that the words "Prince Hall" were incorporated into their title
following a recommendation made at a conference of Prince Hall Grand Masters held in
Arkansas in 1944.
Note that I have used the term, Negro Grand Lodges, and not "Negro Lodges." There exists in
America, at this date, regular, predominately Negro Lodges. For instance, Alpha Lodge
No.116, located in East Orange, New Jersey, which has approximately 171 members is
governed by the authority of the Grand Lodge of New Jersey, F.&A.M.
Now, I will get back to the original question. How does the recognition of Prince Hall
Masonry by some Grand Jurisdictions, affect regular Masonry?
I now offer for your consideration possible results of recognizing Prince Hall Masonry.
What would be some of the advantages of recognizing this clandestine group?
Well, with Prince Hall recognition, their members may be visiting our constituent Lodges, so we may have more
in attendance at our meetings.
Perhaps they may contribute some of their money to our charities or to our Lodges.
Recently in Massachusetts, a Prince Hall Lodge official successfully fostered the idea of a
brotherhood night with a regular lodge. A dinner followed by speakers was held, with
alternate seating to increase the friendliness of the occasion. Ladies and men of the Prince
Hall Order of the Eastern Star prepared the meal, and ladies of the members of the regular
Lodge assisted in serving. Such social gatherings could be expected to increase.
Masonry has been accused of paying lip service to the Fatherhood of God and the
Brotherhood of Man. Recognition may improve our image.
Recognition would almost certainly be the first step toward union of the two organizations.
Thus, the size of our fraternity may increase.
However, certain negative effects may be felt.
The most obvious observation to the question of recognition is that by recognizing "Prince
Hall Masonry," by decree, is inherently counterproductive. All but seven of our Grand
Jurisdictions acknowledge, for the reasons aforementioned and many others, Prince Hall
Masonry is clandestine, and we are by law and obligation restricted from sitting and/or
communicating with clandestine Masons. When the Grand Lodges of Connecticut, Nebraska,
Wisconsin, Colorado, North Dakota, Minnesota and the State of Washington recognized
clandestine Masons as regular, it put the rest of the Grand Lodges in our Nation in a very
precarious position.
Carl H. Claudy, a great Masonic writer, in describing the importance of the obligation,
indicated even though there would be no light and no building, a man might be made a
Master Mason.
On the other hand, no matter how beautiful the building with every working tool and
convenience at hand, there would be no initiation, passing or raising without the obligation.
Most Masons, although not wilfully, but due to human weakness, sometimes break one or
more sections of their obligation.
If a clandestinely made Mason were to attend your lodge, there no doubt would be guilt on
the part of some of the regular Masons in attendance. Picture in your mind the possible
reactions. Some would leave. Some would be afraid of what the clandestine Mason would
think, so they would suppress their emotions and remain silent - but would never return to
Lodge. Others may even strongly state their feelings and objections.
In any case, the peace and harmony of the Lodge would be seriously disturbed - if the lodge,
in fact, continued to exist.
Another great Masonic writer wrote that no matter that the ritual had been exposed, the
deeper meanings of the symbols and allegories of Masonry would not be comprehended
unless a man had been initiated, passed and raised in a just and legally constituted Lodge of
Masons.
If clandestinely made Masons were to sit in a regular Lodge, the Masonic obligation would be broken and in the
highest sense, the lodge would no longer be legal. This may be a hindrance on the part of the members, and
perhaps especially any candidate, to ever understand deeply the symbols and allegory of Masonry .
Recognition of Prince Hall Masonry would mean that there would be two recognized Grand
Lodges in a given State.
It has been the tradition in the United States to have only one regular Grand Lodge within the
boundary of any one State.
The change in American tradition may involve problems.
Prince Hall Masonry is not recognized as legitimate anywhere in the world, except now in
seven American States.
If regular Masonry is to recognize Prince Hall Masonry, then in justice and fairness the
claims of the Grand Lodges that have broken off from Prince Hall Masonry, and even other
clandestine Grand Lodges, would need to be investigated. They deserve the same
consideration, for we will have set precedence by the earlier recognition.
As regular Masons, we must now, and evermore, remain extremely cautious if we wish to visit a lodge in one of
the seven aforerferenced Grand Jurisdictions for fear that a person who has not been regularly initiated, passed
and raised, may be sitting in that regular lodge. How are we to know? It certainly is not easy to recognize as it
once was.
As you know, the Grand Lodge of Louisiana withdrew recognition of the Grand Lodge of
Connecticut as a safeguard for Louisiana Masons not to be inadvertently subjected to the
possibility of sitting with clandestine Masons. During Masonic year 1990, the Grand Master
took a different posture in dealing with the Grand Lodge of Nebraska, Wisconsin, and the
State of Washington. He authored a "Statement of Position" concerning the aforementioned
Grand Lodges, and it was published in the "Louisiana Freemason," our quarterly Masonic
publication. This was done in an effort to effectively alert Louisiana Masons pertaining to the
actions of the Grand Lodges of Connecticut and Nebraska and to reiterate our responsibilities
to our Masonic obligations and our Masonic Law that both forbid us from sitting and/or
communicating with clandestine Masons.
On February 19, 1991, the United Grand Lodge of England published a statement titled
"Prince Hall Masonry and North American Grand Lodges" that read as follows:
"The Board has considered reports that the Grand Lodges of Connecticut, Wisconsin
and the State of Washington have each recognized the 'Prince Hall' Grand Lodge
operating within its jurisdiction, been recognized by it and have established reciprocal
rights of inter-visitation. This means that members of Masonic constitutions not
recognised by the United Grand Lodge of England may be encountered in Lodges in
North America under Grand Lodges that we at present recognize.
Until further notice, Brethren of the English Constitution should not visit Lodges
under the Grand Lodges named above.
Brethren from recognised Masonic jurisdictions in North America (including the four
named above) continue to be welcome at our meetings. "
The following states effected their recognition of Prince Hall Masonry after the
aforereferenced position paper was written and before the United Grand Lodge of England
paper was made cognisant of the referenced States actions. Those dates are as
follows:
(Wisconsin' s action was effected June 18, 1990.)
(Washington State's action was effected June 19, 1990.)
(Colorado ' s action was effected January 28, 1991.)
(North Dakota's action was effected June 1991.)
(Minnesota' s action was effected August 1991.)
The following definitions are taken from Albert Mackey's "Encyclopaedia of Freemasonry":
Clandestine – The ordinary meaning of this word is secret, hidden. The French word
"clandestine," from which it is derived, is defined to be something
done in a hiding-place and against the laws, which best suits the
Masonic signification, which is illegal, not authorized.
Clandestine Lodge- A body of Masons united in a lodge without the consent of a Grand Lodge, or,
although originally legally constituted, continued to work after its charter has been
revoked, is styled a "Clandestine Lodge. "
Clandestine Mason- One made in or affiliated with a clandestine Lodge. With clandestine
Lodges or
Masons, regular Masons and forbidden to associate or converse on
Masonic subjects.
Using Mackey's definitions, it seems clear to me that the only way a man can become a
regular Mason and sit in a Lodge of regular Masons is to be initiated, passed and raised in a
regular Lodge as each of us was. It seems absolutely absurd to view it in any other way.
The Grand Lodge of West Virginia obviously has similar convictions. Their Grand Master for
1991, M: W : Charles E. Forsythe, applaudably has issued two Edicts dealing with the
subject. His Edicts FORBID members of the Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of West
Virginia, A.F.&.A.M., to be present in Lodges under the Grand Lodges of Connecticut,
Wisconsin, Nebraska, State of Washington, Colorado, Minnesota, and North Dakota. His
Edicts DO NOT prohibit members of those named jurisdictions from visiting Lodges under
the jurisdiction of the Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of West Virginia, A.F.&A.M. His show
of strength and concern for Masonic heritage and integrity when dealing with this
controversial and sensitive matter is commendable
In summary, it is my opinion, that the ideal of recognizing clandestine Masonry is ill
conceived and is inherently divisional in its effects toward regular Freemasonry. In these
present times, as we suffer through a period of attitude apathy and lack of interest in the
moral teachings of our fraternity, I repetitiously state that to intentionally cause a division in
our Masonic fraternity is counterproductive and produces absolutely no merit whatsoever.
These should be times, as never before in our existence, for all regular Masons to be pulling
together toward a common cause. The actions taken by the Grand Lodges of Connecticut,
Nebraska, Wisconsin, Colorado, North Dakota, Minnesota and the State of Washington,
relative to recognizing Prince Hall Masonry as legitimate is contrary to a desired goal of
working together, as regular Masons, toward a common cause. This carries with it an
escalated and distinct possibility of causing an irreparable split in Freemasonry in North
America.
INFORMATON SAURCES
"A Problem For The 90's -Prince Hall Freemasonry And The Question of Regularity"
Wallace McLeod, FPS, International Vice-President, The Philalethes Society.
"Important For Regular Masons"
Prepared by Masonic Research Associates, Anchorage, Alaska.
"Foreign Countries"
Carl H. Claudy, Southern Ppublishers, Inc., Masonic Publications Division, Kingsport, Tennessee.
1
Ashlar2006
Masonic Mafia
None of these are by-laws written down and set forth by the GL of Fla.'s constitution . I was looking for the exact wording from your Constitution , not from Masonic authors who have no say in how things are done in the GL of Fla.
Ashlar2006
Masonic Mafia
I am not trying to be difficult with you and I normally try to avoid this subject because it is all so very tiring , but I am only interested in how they can do this . My jurisdiction does not recognize PHA Masons , nor does the MWPHA GL of KY want our recognition or to recognize us . And since we do not recognize PHA Masons in our state , then all MWPHA Grand Lodge's are considered un-recognized . I can't see how PHA Masons from your own state can not set in lodge with you because your GL does not recognize them , but a PHA Mason from NY can . For me , it just doesn't jive . It would be like saying , well the GL of NY now recognizes the Grand Orient de France , and we recognize the GL of NY , ergo we have to allow members of GOdeF in our lodges even though we consider them clandestine . (note: I am not comparing PHA Masons to the Grand Orient de France) .
companion3X3
New Member
Virginia is the only southern state. They rest dont!
companion3X3
New Member
PHA and Your Grand Lodge
Virginia is the only state that does it. The rest dont.
Virginia is the only state that does it. The rest dont.
Ashlar2006
Masonic Mafia
You are incorrect . The GL of NC and MWPHAGL of NC recognize one another . The GL of TX and MWPHAGL of TX are recognition of one another .
companion3X3
New Member
This must be recent then (within the last couple of years).
removed12612
Guest
I believe the GL of IN only recognizes the PHA from IN...we have visitation within Indiana too
Ashlar2006
Masonic Mafia
About 2 or 3 years ago for NC and a little longer for TX . Any brothers from those states know the exact dates ?
companion3X3
New Member
Just the deep south have issues with Prince Hall. I think Brotherly Love prevails everywhere else.