A year or two before California recognized PHA one of the GLs in Mexico asked permission to charter a Spanish speaking lodge in the state of California near the border. The location has a Spanish speaking majority and the only California lodge authorized to work in Spanish is nowhere near there. They asked permission according to ancient tradition. Generosity prevailed and permission was granted.
Now there are 3 jurisdictions that operate at specific locations in the state all with permission of GLofCA.
You probably would be surprised on how it would play out if you tried to force a recognition crisis by recognizing a PHA Grand Lodge not recognized by that State.
it ALREADY happened and no one bothered. About a year and a half ago the MWPHGLofAR issued blanket recognition by edict to every GL that has recognition it their own state.
Does your GL have the "When in Rome" rule which would allow this?Using new mexico as an example......we recognize MWPHGLoNM and they inturn recognize MWPHGLoAR which is not recognized by NM. What if I go visit an NMPHA lodge and a ARPHA brother is visiting as well?
The way the last edition of the pantograph I read was worded the GLNM recognizes MWPHGLNM and all GLs that they recognize.
....apparently a CGMNA GL has recognized PHA AR....new mexico....so what's gonna happen when the GLoAR catches wind of that?
Well, you are quite correct, per page 77 of the 2015 edition. The Colorado entry states the same. I am unsure if this means they "recognize as regular", which is the position of CGMNA, or if they are, indeed, in amity. Thanks for pointing this out. Not entirely sure what to make of it.The way the last edition of the pantograph I read was worded the GLNM recognizes MWPHGLNM and all GLs that they recognize.