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

Discussion in 'Prince Hall Freemasonry' started by thenewyorker83, May 12, 2019.

  1. thenewyorker83

    thenewyorker83 Registered User

    7
    6
    3
    As of May 8th 2019, the Most Worshipful GL of FL and Most Worshipful Union GL of FL (PHA) recognize each other. Congrats for making this happen brethren


    Sent from my iPhone using My Freemasonry Mobile
     
    Bloke, rgarner and dfreybur like this.
  2. SivadSemaj

    SivadSemaj Registered User

    15
    13
    3
    A truly momentous occasion.
     
    thenewyorker83 likes this.
  3. Castro81

    Castro81 Registered User

    22
    11
    3
    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...
     
    Travelling Man91 likes this.
  4. Castro81

    Castro81 Registered User

    22
    11
    3
    If you ask me, its BS. I say FULL RECOGNITION!! Allow me to sit in a lodge with my brothers and hold communication.
     
  5. Winter

    Winter Premium Member

    743
    872
    113
    Baby steps, Brother. We'll get there.

    Transmitted via R5 astromech using Tapatalk Galactic
     
    Bloke, Bill Lins and thenewyorker83 like this.
  6. Castro81

    Castro81 Registered User

    22
    11
    3
    I know, but its been too long already. By this rate, i maybe in the celestial lodge before they do full recognition....
     
    Bloke likes this.
  7. Glen Cook

    Glen Cook G A Cook Site Benefactor

    2,910
    3,344
    183
    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?
     
  8. dfreybur

    dfreybur Premium Member

    3,935
    2,387
    133
    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 likes this.
  9. thenewyorker83

    thenewyorker83 Registered User

    7
    6
    3
    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
     
  10. Elexir

    Elexir Registered User

    711
    539
    93
    Has the MWUGL asked for recognition from UGLE?
     
  11. MRichard

    MRichard Mark A. Ri'chard Premium Member

    846
    608
    113
    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 likes this.
  12. Bill Lins

    Bill Lins Moderating Staff Staff Member

    4,344
    1,141
    183
    Mebbe what we should be demanding is "recognition with privileges"...
     
    MRichard likes this.
  13. Winter

    Winter Premium Member

    743
    872
    113
    What would those privileges be? Conferal of degrees?

    Transmitted via R5 astromech using Tapatalk Galactic
     
  14. Glen Cook

    Glen Cook G A Cook Site Benefactor

    2,910
    3,344
    183
    Given that visitation is not a right in many jurisdictions, why is this critical?
     
  15. Bill Lins

    Bill Lins Moderating Staff Staff Member

    4,344
    1,141
    183
    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.
     
  16. Castro81

    Castro81 Registered User

    22
    11
    3
    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.
     
  17. Glen Cook

    Glen Cook G A Cook Site Benefactor

    2,910
    3,344
    183
    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.
     
    thenewyorker83 likes this.
  18. Winter

    Winter Premium Member

    743
    872
    113
    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
     
    thenewyorker83 and Glen Cook like this.
  19. Castro81

    Castro81 Registered User

    22
    11
    3
    What i mean by “black lodges” im referring to the predominantly black members of those lodges.
     
  20. Glen Cook

    Glen Cook G A Cook Site Benefactor

    2,910
    3,344
    183
    I think you mean lodges which have predominantly black membership. However, this would include clearly clandestine, illicit groups. It is not the better thing to describe lodges by colour. It is better to refer to the jurisdiction; the obedience.
     

Share My Freemasonry