What's new
By:
Advanced search…
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!

Visitation Between Prince Hall and Regular Lodges

Dontrell Stroman

Dontrell Stroman

Premium Member
Squire Bentley said:
There is a univerrsal Masonic definition for clandestine. Clandestine means not chartered by a duly recognized authority or Grand Lodge. Most of these truly clandestine Grand Lodges have corporation charters from their state. These are civil charters not Masonic charters. A duly recognized charter would be one issued from a Grand Lodge that is recognized by the Confeence of Grand Masters of both Mainstream Masonry and PHA Masoney and/or the UGLE. If you don't have the proper papers of foundation you are not duly chartered. If you claim to have a pure bred dog but the dog is not AKC registered or recognized, then it is not pure bred, it does not have proper papers.
Click to expand...
Very well said brother
 
Ripcord22A

Ripcord22A

Site Benefactor
Squire Bentley said:
There is a univerrsal Masonic definition for clandestine. Clandestine means not chartered by a duly recognized authority or Grand Lodge. Most of these truly clandestine Grand Lodges have corporation charters from their state. These are civil charters not Masonic charters. A duly recognized charter would be one issued from a Grand Lodge that is recognized by the Confeence of Grand Masters of both Mainstream Masonry and PHA Masoney and/or the UGLE. If you don't have the proper papers of foundation you are not duly chartered. If you claim to have a pure bred dog but the dog is not AKC registered or recognized, then it is not pure bred, it does not have proper papers.
Click to expand...
While I agree with you brother here is the problem with your definition......not all "Mainstream" or as @dfreybur says "George Washington" affiliated GLs (which are sovereign entities and may be members of the CoGMNA but are not beholden to their recommendations) recognize the African lodge #1s charter as legitimate. and there are PHA lodges that don't recognize their mainstream counterpart. Lets take PHA outta the question....the GL in Italy that the UGLE recognizes is different then the one th CGMNA does......
 
Dontrell Stroman

Dontrell Stroman

Premium Member
Ripcord22A said:
While I agree with you brother here is the problem with your definition......not all "Mainstream" or as @dfreybur says "George Washington" affiliated GLs (which are sovereign entities and may be members of the CoGMNA but are not beholden to their recommendations) recognize the African lodge #1s charter as legitimate. and there are PHA lodges that don't recognize their mainstream counterpart. Lets take PHA outta the question....the GL in Italy that the UGLE recognizes is different then the one th CGMNA does......
Click to expand...
What GL are you speaking of that doesnt recognize African Lodge #1 charter ? And what would be the reason for not recognizing it ?
 
Glen Cook

Glen Cook

G A Cook
Site Benefactor
Squire Bentley said:
There is a univerrsal Masonic definition for clandestine. Clandestine means not chartered by a duly recognized authority or Grand Lodge. Most of these truly clandestine Grand Lodges have corporation charters from their state. These are civil charters not Masonic charters. A duly recognized charter would be one issued from a Grand Lodge that is recognized by the Confeence of Grand Masters of both Mainstream Masonry and PHA Masoney and/or the UGLE. If you don't have the proper papers of foundation you are not duly chartered. If you claim to have a pure bred dog but the dog is not AKC registered or recognized, then it is not pure bred, it does not have proper papers.
Click to expand...
No, there is not a universal definition of clandestine. I don't disagree with this definition, but some grand lodges don't even use the term. As one who actually works in the recognition area, it really is not a universal term. For some grand lodges, any body not in Amity with them is clandestine.

Many grand regular lodges are incorporated, so that is not a determining factor either.

Many, if not most, US regular grand lodges are not chartered by another grand Lodge. Don't forget Scotland as a "source" of regularity for US GLs. Note, none of the Home GLs "chartered" US "grand lodges."
 
Last edited:
MRichard

MRichard

Mark A. Ri'chard
Premium Member
It's interesting that some continue to bring up the irregular beginnings of PHA, yet, there were several grand lodges that were formed irregularly during those times. I seldom hear anyone question their legitimacy.
 
SimonM

SimonM

Registered User
MRichard said:
It's interesting that some continue to bring up the irregular beginnings of PHA, yet, there were several grand lodges that were formed irregularly during those times. I seldom hear anyone question their legitimacy.
Click to expand...

Can you name some of the GL that had irregular starts?
 
MRichard

MRichard

Mark A. Ri'chard
Premium Member
SimonM said:
Can you name some of the GL that had irregular starts?
Click to expand...

"In the 18th Century, however, three Grand Lodges in North America were formed by not three but two Lodges, and the Grand Lodge of New Jersey was formed simply by a Grand Convention of Masons. By standards then prevailing, the formation of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Massachusetts could have been seen as merely eccentric, and of acceptable regularity."

It was on the Bessel's website but it doesn't appear to be working now but you can still see a cached version of it on google. Maybe this will work instead. http://webcache.googleusercontent.c.../masrec/phaugle.htm+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
 
SimonM

SimonM

Registered User
MRichard said:
"In the 18th Century, however, three Grand Lodges in North America were formed by not three but two Lodges, and the Grand Lodge of New Jersey was formed simply by a Grand Convention of Masons. By standards then prevailing, the formation of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Massachusetts could have been seen as merely eccentric, and of acceptable regularity."
Click to expand...
Interesting, I had no idea they were formed that way!
 
Glen Cook

Glen Cook

G A Cook
Site Benefactor
MRichard said:
"In the 18th Century, however, three Grand Lodges in North America were formed by not three but two Lodges, and the Grand Lodge of New Jersey was formed simply by a Grand Convention of Masons. By standards then prevailing, the formation of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Massachusetts could have been seen as merely eccentric, and of acceptable regularity."

It was on the Bessel's website but it doesn't appear to be working now but you can still see a cached version of it on google. Maybe this will work instead. http://webcache.googleusercontent.c.../masrec/phaugle.htm+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
Click to expand...
Edit: TN received a charter from NC. See http://www.grandlodge-tn.org/main/GLTN-page.asp?p=24
 
Last edited:
Companion Joe

Companion Joe

Premium Member
The Grand Lodge of Tennessee was formed when the lodges already chartered west of the Appalachians petitioned the GL of North Carolina to relinquish authority and form our own Grand Lodge. My lodge was originally chartered in 1801 as as No. 3 of Tennessee and No. 43 of North Carolina. My fourth great grandfather, Rev. Stephen Brooks, was chairman of the committee assigned to petition the GLNC to form the GLoT. That happened in December of 1813 at an official ceremony in Knoxville.
 
Glen Cook

Glen Cook

G A Cook
Site Benefactor
Companion Joe said:
The Grand Lodge of Tennessee was formed when the lodges already chartered west of the Appalachians petitioned the GL of North Carolina to relinquish authority and form our own Grand Lodge. My lodge was originally chartered in 1801 as as No. 3 of Tennessee and No. 43 of North Carolina. My fourth great grandfather, Rev. Stephen Brooks, was chairman of the committee assigned to petition the GLNC to form the GLoT. That happened in December of 1813 at an official ceremony in Knoxville.
Click to expand...
Right, but was the GL formed by convention or by the lodges?
 
Companion Joe

Companion Joe

Premium Member
There were nine of North Carolina-chartered lodges in Tennessee by 1812. They appointed delegates to petition the GLof NC to break off and form the GLoT. North Carolina agreed to relinquish control, and in 1813 officially chartered the Grand Lodge of Tennessee at a ceremony with reps from both states.
I guess the answer to your question is sort of both. It's not like the lodges went rogue and just said, "We're doing this." The lodges started the process to form a new GL, and a year later at NC's annual communication, it was agreed.
 
Glen Cook

Glen Cook

G A Cook
Site Benefactor
Companion Joe said:
There were nine of North Carolina-chartered lodges in Tennessee by 1812. They appointed delegates to petition the GLof NC to break off and form the GLoT. North Carolina agreed to relinquish control, and in 1813 officially chartered the Grand Lodge of Tennessee at a ceremony with reps from both states.
I guess the answer to your question is sort of both. It's not like the lodges went rogue and just said, "We're doing this." The lodges started the process to form a new GL, and a year later at NC's annual communication, it was agreed.
Click to expand...
Edit: TN received a charter from NC. See http://www.grandlodge-tn.org/main/GLTN-page.asp?p=24
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top