My Freemasonry | Freemason Information and Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

mainstream or Prince Hall

Rifleman1776

Registered User
The wording in the obligation is different in every jurisdiction. So far I've learned two and am in the process of learning a third. Sure enough that part of the obligation is slightly different in each version. The ones I have learned all say to obey the rules of the jurisdiction I am a member of so they handle the case of transferring my membership. As I am now a member in 3 jurisdictions I see a few extra restrictions compared to a member of only 1 jurisdiction.

The wording includes the word "or" in a way that might be ambiguous. Ask yourself if it means to obey the rules of your mother jurisdiction "and" your current jurisdiction. Ask yourself if it means to obey the rules of your mother jurisdiction "or" your current jurisdiction.

Then also look up if your current jurisdiction has an "act like the locals" or an "act like you are at home" rule for visits.

Thanks, Bro Doug. It is not hard to act like a local when I am one. My Lodge in Missouri is only 25 miles from my old one in Arkansas. I don't work at it, I just try to be a Brother.
 

MarkR

Premium Member
Just a side note. Last weekend I held a conference for lodge education officers. One of the speakers was the Grand Master of Prince Hall Masons in Minnesota. He referred to Prince Hall and Mainstream, so the term didn't seem to bother him. FWIW.
 

montkun

Registered User
I think the term has stuck simply because it's been a relatively short period of time that PHA has been accepted by "Mainstream" lodges of the state. In Pennsylvania it's only been roughly over 20 years since full reciprocity between lodges, however we still cannot have dual membership in PHA and the state Grand Lodge. But it is what it is, despite my PHA obligation stating....

"Furthermore, I do promise and swear to support the Constitution, Laws and Edicts of the Most Worshipful Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania, Grand Lodge of the State of Pennsylvania,..."
 

Warrior1256

Site Benefactor
I think the term has stuck simply because it's been a relatively short period of time that PHA has been accepted by "Mainstream" lodges of the state. In Pennsylvania it's only been roughly over 20 years since full reciprocity between lodges, however we still cannot have dual membership in PHA and the state Grand Lodge. But it is what it is, despite my PHA obligation stating....

"Furthermore, I do promise and swear to support the Constitution, Laws and Edicts of the Most Worshipful Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania, Grand Lodge of the State of Pennsylvania,..."
Yeah, it's unfortunate. As stated before, in Kentucky the GL of K and PH GL recognize each other but we still do not have visitation rights. I would really like to visit with my PH brothers.
 

montkun

Registered User
That's at least one good point in PA is that both of the Grand Lodges allow visitations as long as the Brother is regular. Just can't be a member of both, but if you wanted to leave one branch to join the other it's not a major problem. Though I'm sure either side will do their best to retain your membership before releasing you.
 
Top