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!

MWUGL of FL and MWGL of FL mutual recognition and amity approved.

Castro81

Registered User
Dont go getting too happy just yet... They will only allow delegates to attend Grand Communication, and we still cannot hold masonic communication, or sit in a stated meeting, and vice versa...
 

Glen Cook

G A Cook
Site Benefactor
I know, but its been too long already. By this rate, i maybe in the celestial lodge before they do full recognition....
It is full recognition. Clearly the concern regarding visitation is the underlying concern. However, visitation isn’t, in many jurisdictions, a right. If visitation isn’t a right, how can it be the sine qua non of recognition?
 

dfreybur

Premium Member
Dont go getting too happy just yet... They will only allow delegates to attend Grand Communication, and we still cannot hold masonic communication, or sit in a stated meeting, and vice versa...

As long as the recognition itself was full recognition, it's fine to allow the paperwork time to settle. When California recognized I remember it taking a year to exchange lodge lists and such, even though we got permission from GL to call the local PHA lodge and invite them to be a tenant in our building. They had asked us about that a year before.
 

thenewyorker83

Registered User
Pretty soon you will see the UNITED GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND list the MWUGL as a recognized foreign body on their website. One of the requirements for recognition is that the “Mainstream” and “PHA” recognize each other, if not then they will only list mainstream.


Sent from my iPad using My Freemasonry Mobile
 

Elexir

Registered User
Pretty soon you will see the UNITED GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND list the MWUGL as a recognized foreign body on their website. One of the requirements for recognition is that the “Mainstream” and “PHA” recognize each other, if not then they will only list mainstream.


Sent from my iPad using My Freemasonry Mobile

Has the MWUGL asked for recognition from UGLE?
 

MRichard

Mark A. Ri'chard
Premium Member
Quite a few states have started with recognition without visitation. Most times both sides want it that way. In Texas, recognition without visitation was in 2007, visitation was approved at the end of 2014, I believe.
 

Bill Lins

Moderating Staff
Staff Member
IMHO, we have created 2 classes of Masons- those with whom we may freely attend each other's Lodges, participate in each other's degree conferrals, and the like, and those with whom we may not share these privileges. Just seems wrong to me- if we are in amity with them, we (& they) should be allowed to share said privileges.
 

Castro81

Registered User
IMHO, we have created 2 classes of Masons- those with whom we may freely attend each other's Lodges, participate in each other's degree conferrals, and the like, and those with whom we may not share these privileges. Just seems wrong to me- if we are in amity with them, we (& they) should be allowed to share said privileges.
I agree. Its ridiculous that we cant attend each others lodges freely and participate. In the end we all recognize the same landmarks. I feel this always and will always be about race, and please correct me if im wrong, but it just seems like the black lodges always get shade from the mainstream side. Just a bunch of BS.
 

Glen Cook

G A Cook
Site Benefactor
I agree. Its ridiculous that we cant attend each others lodges freely and participate. In the end we all recognize the same landmarks. I feel this always and will always be about race, and please correct me if im wrong, but it just seems like the black lodges always get shade from the mainstream side. Just a bunch of BS.

Well, we don’t all recognise the same landmarks.

Not sure what the “black lodges “ refers to.

The PHA system is considered regular by CGMNA, UGLE and the vast majority of the SGLs.

As for attending lodges freely, note that not all GLs consider visitation a right.
 

Winter

Premium Member
I agree. Its ridiculous that we cant attend each others lodges freely and participate. In the end we all recognize the same landmarks. I feel this always and will always be about race, and please correct me if im wrong, but it just seems like the black lodges always get shade from the mainstream side. Just a bunch of BS.
This must isn't true. First, not all jurisdictions recognize the same landmarks. Some dont officially recognize any. Secondly, many jurisdictions have full visitation rites between the MS and PHA lodges. With no shade thrown in either direction. While I wont pretend there arent some areas that still have some backward thinking, the overall trend is getting better every year in my opinion.

Transmitted via R5 astromech using Tapatalk Galactic
 

Castro81

Registered User
Well, we don’t all recognise the same landmarks.

Not sure what the “black lodges “ refers to.

The PHA system is considered regular by CGMNA, UGLE and the vast majority of the SGLs.

As for attending lodges freely, note that not all GLs consider visitation a right.
What i mean by “black lodges” im referring to the predominantly black members of those lodges.
 
Top