Recognition and Regularity

The history of mutual recognition between Prince Hall Masons and A.F. & A.M Freemasons in the state of Maryland reflects broader societal changes in Masonic traditions and the evolving relationship between these two Masonic bodies. Here’s a summary:

Early Context: The division between the two Masonic bodies dates back to the founding of Prince Hall Freemasonry in the late 18th century. Prince Hall Freemasonry was established as a separate body, primarily for African American Masons, due to racial segregation within mainstream (A.F. & A.M.) Freemasonry. Attempts at Recognition: Over the years, there have been various attempts to bridge the divide between Prince Hall Masons and mainstream Masons. However, these efforts often faced resistance due to deeply ingrained social and racial attitudes.

Maryland’s Mutual Recognition: In 2003, the Grand Lodge of Maryland (A.F. & A.M.) formally recognized the Most Worshipful Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Maryland. This marked a significant milestone in Masonic history, signaling a move toward inclusivity and cooperation between the two bodies.

Impact: The mutual recognition in Maryland has allowed for greater collaboration and interaction between members of Prince Hall and mainstream Masonic lodges, fostering unity and inclusivity within the broader Masonic community.

Continuing Progress: Since Maryland’s mutual recognition, other states have followed suit, furthering the trend of unity and mutual respect between the two Masonic bodies across the United States.

Overall, the history of mutual recognition in Maryland reflects a significant shift toward inclusivity, cooperation, and unity within the Masonic community, demonstrating the potential for progress even in long-established institutions.

The initial attempts at mutual recognition between Prince Hall Masons and A.F. & A.M. Freemasons faced various challenges, leading to their failure. Here are key reasons for these failures:

Racial Segregation: Historically, racial segregation played a significant role in hindering mutual recognition. Prince Hall Freemasonry emerged in the late 18th century as a separate body primarily for African American Masons due to the exclusion of

Black individuals from mainstream (A.F. & A.M.) lodges. The lingering effects of racial discrimination continued to impede efforts at reconciliation.

Traditionalist Views: Many mainstream Masons held conservative or traditionalist views, resisting changes that would lead to recognition or integration. These views stemmed from established norms and practices that were resistant to adapting to societal changes.

Organizational Autonomy: Both Masonic bodies maintained a degree of organizational autonomy, with distinct structures, traditions, and governing bodies. This separation made it challenging to find common ground for mutual recognition.

Lack of Dialogue: For a significant period, there was limited dialogue between the two Masonic bodies, preventing progress toward mutual recognition. The absence of communication and engagement further entrenched the divide.

Legal and Regulatory Issues: In some cases, legal and regulatory concerns also played a role. For example, state-level Masonic laws and constitutions governing lodges and grand lodges imposed additional hurdles to recognition and integration.

Over time, societal attitudes toward race and inclusivity evolved, allowing for greater dialogue and collaboration between Prince Hall Masons and A.F. & A.M. Freemasons. These changes eventually paved the way for successful mutual recognition in several states, including Maryland.

It’s important to note that during the colonial period, most GLoS GLs and the UGLE were clandestine, a testament to the rich and clandestine history of the Masonic community. The Moderns broke away in the UGLE, and now the antients are considered irregular and unrecognized.

Take the GLofNy, for instance, pulling recognition from the GL of Scotland a while back; this action didn’t make either GL any less regular or legitimate. It was merely punishment one posed on the other for whatever reason. It was the same when multiple GLs pulled recognition from the PHA GL of LA(Slaughter invading FL and the Virgin Islands). Pulling recognition didn’t make the PHA GL of LA any less regular or legitimate. It was used to get his attention and let him know the regular Masonic isn’t having any of that without consequences

Should GLoS be held accountable? Yes, they should, but then the issue of “ Sovereignty ” comes into place. The great “Every GL is Sovereign “ so they do as they please is the justification for said actions. However, in my humble opinion, I believe all regular GLS should pull recognition from any GL that refuses to recognize their PHA counterparts, unless they can provide a logical explanation as to why they won’t recognize them as legitimate masons. This would ensure transparency and fairness in our community.

Some opine that this opens the door for clandestine masons to claim they are seeking “ Regularity” as well. Two issues come to mind on that. Three things must be accounted for for a GL to be recognized as regular.

1. Legitimacy of Origin. (None of them have except PHO… if one wants to be technical.)

2. Exclusive territory jurisdiction ( there are only two regular GLS per most states. GLoS and PHA GL.

Legal recognition of a status or fact in a jurisdiction formally acknowledges it as being authentic, valid, legal, or worthy of consideration. It may involve approval or the granting of rights. While any establishment may grant a qualification, only recognized qualifications from recognized establishments entitle the holder to practice the restricted occupation.

1. Do they have a charter or dispensation from some grand body empowering them to work?

2. Do they have a legitimate constitution?

3. What are the rights and privileges of its members?

We ask these questions to ensure that our affiliation is accepted and respected as a time-honored institution when we meet our brothers from other jurisdictions. So why join something you know little about and can’t defend; why are you a member?

These and other paramount questions should be asked when joining any organization.

References: Available upon request.

R.W. Akoni S. Vaughans, Sr. KT° 33º Editor in Chief, The Light Magazine