# Petition for Joint Recognition and Visitation



## Michael Neumann

Brethren,

History has shown that we have been successful in our simple quest to make good men better. Through lists such as those including Nat 'King' Cole and President Harry S. Truman we can see many of the names that have graced our halls and our successes through their works. We have enjoyed a rich history since our official birth in 1717 and we have survived numerous conflicts both internally and externally. 

The years of infancy were filled with turmoil, to the point that there was a brief split in the ranks. 

*Points of Difference between 'Antients' and 'Moderns' *

“We shall fail to understand the controversy and its bearing upon present-day freemasonry unless we examine, however briefly, the differences that distinguished the two bodies. The transposition of the modes of recognition in the First and Second Degrees was an outstanding difference to which reference has already been made, and it was regarded with something akin to horror by a great many masons, whether owning allegiance to the Grand Lodge or not. There were many other differences, some of them probably going back to pre-Grand Lodge days….” “…over a large part of the three-quarters of a century ending nominally in 1813. It must also be made clear that the matters comprehended by this question have been much debated and every Masonic scholar has his individual opinion on many of them.”

With this contention holding strong from 1751 until 1813 there were many who conceded that we would not resolve this conflict. We did and have since then continued to strengthen the bonds of brotherhood across our world. It was by no degree easy to move past the differences we realized that unity was needed, it was in our obligations, regulations, and accepted that a house divided cannot stand. A similar schism has been experienced here in the United States of America.

On March 6, 1775 “Lodge #441, Irish Constitution, John Batt- Master, who was a sergeant in the British Army stationed under General Gage at Castle Williams, Boston, Mass., initiated Prince Hall” (Tupper, 2010). It is not this event that cause the schism but the events that ensued. OnJuly 4, 1776we declared our independence and spent the next several years fighting viciously to defend it. During this time the payment of dues to the Grand Lodge in England was difficult at best and many lodges fell into the arrears. Intensifying this difficulty, as we seen earlier, from 1751-1813 masonry in England was going through its own growing pains. As our nation slowly emerged and began governing herself our lodges fought for precedence over one another. Jurisdictions were formed and it was Accepted that the now United Grand Lodge of England was our mother lodge. 

In 1784 Prince Hall was granted a warrant under the English registry. 

“Freemason’s proudly proclaim the supremacy of the Grand Lodge of England. It was the Grand Lodge of England that granted a warrant on September 29, 1784 for African Lodge No. 459, and this warrant is still in existence.” (Milliken, n.d.)

“In 1813, it and the other English Lodges in the United States were erased. Incidentally, African Lodge #459 had been renumbered #370 in 1792 but the Lodge was unaware of this.” (Tupper, 2010)

Because of the times and many other factors African Lodge was cast aside by “mainstream” masonry during for formation of Grand Lodges within the US and eventually deemed irregular, regardless of the fact they held a valid charter from the mother lodge. Whether or not they went dormant for a number of years or whether or not they for a short time declared independence from the UGLE matters not for the UGLE now recognizes Prince Hall Affiliated Masonry, so should we. With this recognition come all the rights, lights and privileges up to and including the inter-visitation we desire.

It is with these facts in mind that I humbly request that we reassess our stance in regards to Prince Hall Affiliated Masonry and her Grand Lodges. Both rivers of masonry run parallel and are stepped in a deep & rich history, connecting these two rivers with the tributaries of joint recognition and inter-visitation would provide strength and unity. Each of us has obligated ourselves to abide by the rules, regulations, and edicts of our Lodge and Grand Lodge. We have proudly maintained these obligations and will continue to uphold them so long as the GAOTU permits. Amending these regulations to permit the exchange of Masonic communications between our neighbors, coworkers, and in many cases family members would provide a greater sense of pleasure in our craft.






*For this cause to pass, please visit your state link below and fill out the petition. Print a copy to send and then submit the form, each form is pointed to the state specific Grand Lodge email. Texas PHA did not have an email available so I directed to the lodges.*


Research links that provided much of the information above - 
http://www.freemasoninformation.com/2009/11/prince-hall-myths-legends-and-facts/
http://mastermason.com/brothergene/education/ancients_and_moderns.htm
http://web.mit.edu/dryfoo/Masonry/Essays/pha1.html

State Petition Forms - 
TX
TX PHA
AL 
AL PHA 
AR (No GL Email) 
AR PHA 
FL 
FL PHA (Still awaiting email) 
GA 
GA PHA (Still awaiting email) 
KY 
KY PHA 
LA
LA PHA (Still awaiting email)
MS
MS PHA
SC
SC PHA
TN
TN PHA
WV
WV PHA

If anyone notices missing links or additional emails that should be included please inform me.

Here is the FB page https://www.facebook.com/#!/MasonicAmity once the website is complete I will release it on this thread.


----------



## chrmc

I think this is a great initiative, but have to ask the question if we're certain that both sides actually want this?

I was at an event this weekend and met with some more knowledgeable brothers who told me that a large part of the hangup with moving this forward is coming from PHA. Apparently there is a fear that more integration will lead to the path of their grand lodge and subsequently the masonic ritual being consumed within GLoTX in the long run. 

Not sure if this is true, or if the point has any merit, but though it was interesting to hear.


----------



## Michael Neumann

chrmc said:


> I think this is a great initiative, but have to ask the question if we're certain that both sides actually want this?



Over the years I have heard many many of our brethren, from both sides of masonry, discuss how nice it would be if we all could meet on the level. This is their opportunity to action their hours of discussion, we will see what happens.


----------



## Brother JC

I wish you luck on this endeavor. As a Mason in a jurisdiction with full recognition and visitation with my Prince Hall Brethren, I heartily support you.


----------



## Blake Bowden

Fantastic work! Sticking this post....


Freemason Connect Premium App


----------



## Michael Neumann

Launched 2 days ago and we have 10 petitions submitted and 81 likes on FB. Filling out the form is easy, click send and you are done. Click print for those lodges without an email.


----------



## Blake Bowden

Posted to our Facebook page.


----------



## bupton52

I must say that the brotherly love exhibited in this forum doesn't always mirror the sentiments on the facebook page.........


----------



## Michael Neumann

bupton52 said:


> I must say that the brotherly love exhibited in this forum doesn't always mirror the sentiments on the facebook page.........



With an ad campaign targeting a FB audience of 272K I knew in advance that there were going to be a few individuals that were anti-masons... one already hit the page. Then there would be the esoteric conspiracy theorists... have had one of those already too. They are easy to deal with, it will be brethren opposed to joint recognition that will have to be dealt with gently. In writing the petition I visited EVERY regular Grand Lodge website in the US and read through the reasons for opposition in the AR lodge among others. 

The big push is going to be getting people to actually fill out a petition for their state. Over the years I have been hung out to dry a number of times by people wanting something, desiring something, and then when I push for it.... I find I am standing there all alone. 

As Bryan Maloney stated "...Masons are Workers." So I have faith that petitions will start making their way to the Grand Lodges. 10 already sent... 990 more and we might be able to say "Psalms 133 Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity..."


----------



## crono782

are you talking about the FB page you set up or the MoT FB page?


----------



## Michael Neumann

crono782 said:


> are you talking about the FB page you set up or the MoT FB page?



The one I set up. I have an ad campaign that uses Masonic, freemason, masonry, York, etc. as keywords. The audience shows right around 272K. Right now I am paying .67 cents per impression, as of 4hrs ago the page had roughly 8,991 impressions, 148 clicks and 109 actions from the ad. Still only 10 petitions that I know of filled out but they are reading the petition at the Shrine/Scottish rite meeting tonight so there should be more shortly.


----------



## Michael Neumann

crono782 said:


> are you talking about the FB page you set up or the MoT FB page?



The FB page I set up has one purpose in life - pass visitation.


----------



## Ecossais

According the annual report of the Committee on Fraternal Correspondence of the GL of Texas, it was the Prince Hall GL of Texas that cancelled the Spring meeting last year at which the two GLs were to amend the Agreement and allow visitation. The Committee also said that it stands ready to move forward. The GL of Texas approved that report. Also, is everyone aware that the PHGL invaded the jurisdiction of the GL of the Ivory Coast last year? Has that been resolved?

If the GL of Texas stands ready to resume talks with the PHGL, then shouldn't this petition be directed to the PHGL?


----------



## bupton52

Ecossais said:


> Also, is everyone aware that the PHGL invaded the jurisdiction of the GL of the Ivory Coast last year?



Do you have any additional details about that? Just for grins, would you say that the PHGLs established in their respective states in the North America invaded the jurisdiction of the "mainstream" (I really hate that description) GLs in their respective states in North America as well?

The reason I ask that is because it has been suggested that there may have been some additional circumstances that would have "allowed" that to happen. Again, I don't have all of the information about this situation, so any dialogue from me is just speculation.


----------



## Michael Neumann

The guestbook of http://www.mwuglflorida.org/ shows contacts from the Ivory Coast.

As of now we have:
This month - All Forms had 23 submissions


----------



## BryanMaloney

bupton52 said:


> Do you have any additional details about that? Just for grins, would you say that the PHGLs established in their respective states in the North America invaded the jurisdiction of the "mainstream" (I really hate that description) GLs in their respective states in North America as well?



At that time, there was wholesale denial of Freemasonry to men in the USA merely because they were black. The abnormal situation is because of a festering evil that still infects American culture. Is the claim being made that Ivory Coast Freemasonry denies men because they are black?


----------



## bupton52

BryanMaloney said:


> At that time, there was wholesale denial of Freemasonry to men in the USA merely because they were black. The abnormal situation is because of a festering evil that still infects American culture. Is the claim being made that Ivory Coast Freemasonry denies men because they are black?



It was suggested, but I honestly don't know. 

Freemason Connect Premium App


----------



## Michael Neumann

bupton52 said:


> It was suggested, but I honestly don't know.
> 
> Freemason Connect Premium App



When I was in Iraq there were 2 men from South Africa on our team. According to them racism is severe in some parts of the country, as if they were lagging behind us by 100 years. Having never visited the country myself the only thing I can rely upon are accounts from media (undependable at best) and tidbits from actual South Africans.

Either way the lodge issue seems to be resolved with Florida providing support. 

On a related note brought about by a recent issue on FB - 

Perhaps it is my upbringing in the military community or a fact of how I was raised but when I wake up in the morning I see a man (rather good looking on some days   ), I see an American man, I see a man who needs to brush his hair, I see a man who needs to finish his class, or work on his car, or buy flowers for his wife, or take his kids to the soccer field. I do not see a Christian, I do not see a Muslim, I do not see a Hindi. I do not see a white man or a black man, color simply does not factor when I look at myself and it does not factor when I look at another..... The fact is I see a man... If someone looks at themselves or at another and sees anything other than a man (generically speaking of course if any ladies are reading this thread) then they have some internal issues to work out within themselves, do not drag me into it and certainly do not drag our beautiful craft into it.

All this is why masonry was a perfect fit for me, everything about the craft fits perfectly with my views, I was a mason before I was a mason. 

This is also why I cannot understand the nonsense separation of these two valuable streams of masonry... it is upsetting that no matter who I ask all they can provide back is an attempt to make a simple matter overly complex. Adjust section II. and III. reprint and re-issue... repeat across the 10 remaining states. Problem solved, Masonry strengthened, we can resume attending to more important matters like saving our country from itself.


----------



## SeeKer.mm

Thanks for starting this petition.  CT allows inter-visitation and dual membership...the harmony between both GL's is a great thing.


----------



## Blake Bowden

Out of all the years I've been running this site and our facebook page, I've never heard one negative comment from those whose respective Grand Lodge's permit inter-visitation. Every single comment that I've read has nothing but praise and respect each other. I've been vocal on this issue, quieted down a bit, but this year I'm going to utilize everything at my disposal to get the word out. 

The single question that always stumps those who oppose inter-visitation is "What would it hurt?" There aren't any negatives, unless you're a racist, and trust me, I know first hand that racism is alive and well in Freemasonry on BOTH sides. Maybe that's what fuels my desire to see this move forward.

One more thing to think about, if we had mutual recognition and visitation, those brave men serving overseas would be able to visit military Prince Hall Lodges that are under the Jurisdiction of the MWPHGLXTX. That's the kind of Masonry I want to be part of.


----------



## Billy Jones

Just sent mine for Mississippi! Bro. Neumann can you link you FB page I would to share it


----------



## Billy Jones

HA!!! NM I see it!!


----------



## Michael Neumann

Here is a list of recognized lodges straight from the UGLE http://www.ugle.org.uk/about-ugle/recognised-foreign-grand-lodges/grand-lodges-in-north-america/  It is between these lodges we should enjoy mutual recognition and visitation.


----------



## Michael Neumann

Great post from 'Pat' Trainor on the FB page

 "...To be as brief as possible, and to lead the reader to their own research, Prince Hall was an amazing person of his time. Literate, sly, persuasive and a sensitive negotiator-even for a white person this was rare. But you have to remember only one fact to understand why there wouldn't have have even been a PH Masonry if Prince Hall hadn't died. He was an 'abolitionist', which means that he opposed the slave trade, and human trafficking. He saw Masonry, and rightly so, as the vehicle to meet with the whites elbow to elbow-as equals. This would show the learned men in control of the slave trade that the black man was no different, and undeserving to be marginalized. Imagine his shock if today the masonry that bears his name even existed. He was extremely opposed to 'equal but separate', and would see a parallel Masonry as a setback and a failure."


----------



## Michael Neumann

Here is an update, over 35K impressions 740 likes and we are averaging 1-2 forms submitted daily. 


For all the response and support the petition is getting there are not as many forms being submitted as I would like, does anyone here recommend changes or updates that would generate more follow through?


----------



## towerbuilder7

AMEN BROTHER........Blake, I stand behind you 100 pct......you scream first, and I'll scream behind you, until the hardheads decide to have a renewing of the minds.    if they don't, as I have always stated, a competent check on the decisions OR INDECISIONS of elected Brethren is the VOTE.   and, I applaud Bro Neumann for his efforts as well.   THAT EXEMPLIFIES TRUE MASONRY----a Brother that sees ONE PLANET, ONE CRAFT, ONE BROTHERHOOD......Men of all races, credds, and cultures who have one common thread..........Of course, on the PHA side, we are constantly having to contend with Clandestine Organizations, which cause confusion amongst Men who desire to join a Masonic Lodge.   Proper education to those who express interest can assist us with that issue.

Also, I'd like to make mention of today being the 238th Anniversary of the initiation of Bro. Prince Hall into Masonry----March 6, 1775 marked a very important date in AMERICAN History.    These 15 men were AMERICANS, initiated into a British Lodge on AMERICAN SOIL.   It is good to be back on the Forum Brothers.   I had been off for almost two months, to care for my Wife after surgery for a very bad Staph Infection.........she is healing and recovering well........glad to be back on reading and sharing with the Bros....................BRO. JONES


----------



## Cblack

Mine has been sent...waiting to see what the response will be

Freemason Connect Premium App


----------



## Michael Neumann

Between this site and the social networking campaign we are maintaining a rate of  1-2 submissions a day between the 11 states. The only states I am counting out are MS and FL because the PHA lodges have been dropped from the UGLE roles.


----------



## Ashlar76

Sent mine. I support this 100%.


----------



## Michael Neumann

We started on 2013-02-25, have been active for 13 days with 40 submissions throughout the 11 states we are sending petitions to. The page performance is as follows, impressions = 325,056 the clicks = 2,521 and the actions = 1,748. The breakdown is below:


ImpressionsSocial ImpressionsSocial %ClicksSocial ClicksClick Through RateSocial CTR287,87172,13125.06%1,8332260.64%0.31%29,59829,598100.00%3603601.22%1.22%3,9543,95399.97%1831834.63%4.63%15985.03%21013.21%0.00%2,2371,77279.21%30261.34%1.47%1,22288672.50%87627.12%7.00%1300.00%2015.39%0.00%242395.83%114.17%4.35%


----------



## Michael Neumann

Work is pounding me 7/11.5 so I have not been as vocal, even so we are at almost 1300 "likes" and almost 100 petitions throughout the south 11.


----------



## Blake Bowden

Excerpt from the 2007 compact....

"Be it remembered that on December 1, 2006, The Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of Texas, in its 171st Grand Annual Communication acted favorably on the July 13, 2005 request of The Most Worshipful Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Texas, F. & A.M., and Jurisdiction, requesting fraternal recognition". 

Thank you for this petition, I hope this sends a signal that the time for visitation is now. There's no excuse.


----------



## Blake Bowden

A Brother by the name of David M. Baskin claims that he was on the Fraternal Relations committee when the compact was signed and that it was the MWPHGLOTX who did not want visitation, only recognition. I've heard this repeatedly over the years and the main reason was because both GL's, more so the MWPHGLOTX, were concerned about racism from BOTH sides.

A petition brings attention to the issue, but how do we get this this done? I'm not familiar with the bylaws of the MWPHGLOTX, but there has to be a way to bring a vote to allow visitation. If approved, that would effectively put the ball in "our court". It's been done in other Jurisdictions. If the MWPHGLOTX refuses to extend visitation, why couldn't members of the MWGLOTX propose a resolution do it? Talk about shaking things up! 

Should this be made in the form of a resolution? If Prince Hall won't do anything, let's take the higher ground and set an example. Now THAT would shake things up!


----------



## Cblack

I doubt that the GLoTX will draft a resolution for visitation...it being the older GL and giving the MWPHGLOTX an opportunity the first time will wait for us to do it...the problem is that I don't think that anyone on our side has the balls to even bring it to the floor because they are afraid of being outcasted within the jurisdiction....but seeing and realising how important it is I plan on doing just that in June


----------



## JFS61

Has anyone actually contacted the Fraternal Relations Committee for their side of the story?


----------



## Blake Bowden

Cblack said:


> I doubt that the GLoTX will draft a resolution for visitation...it being the older GL and giving the MWPHGLOTX an opportunity the first time will wait for us to do it...the problem is that I don't think that anyone on our side has the balls to even bring it to the floor because they are afraid of being outcasted within the jurisdiction....but seeing and realising how important it is I plan on doing just that in June



I've sent numerous emails to Past Grand Masters of the Grand Lodge of Texas, Grand Master Walt Rogers, Deputy Grand Master (R.W.) Jerry Martin, as well as the Prince Hall Grand Master, M.W. Wilbert Curtis yet none will take the time to reply to my to extending relations. Zero. Nada. Zip.

That being said, I have posted links to the petition on several Masonic Facebook Groups.


----------



## Michael Neumann

The petitions show a steady stream, rarely a day goes by without one being sent in. The sites will remain and we will continue pushing until this resolution has passed. Nothing is to be lost through visitation and the world is to be gained.


----------



## Squire Bentley

As a Prince Hall Mason I laud your efforts in this endeavor. Knowing Grand Master Curtis as I do and the other Prince Hall Texas Grand officers, negotiation, according to Masonic protocol, will be done in private between the two Grand Masters. Such is the way affairs are conducted between the President of the United States and foreign nations. I would not interpret, however, the non replies from the Grand Masters as a disagreement with your cause. Such might be the case but it also might not.

I think, for me anyway, the long term goal is to turn Freemasonry from a top down society back to a bottom up society. You are certainly paving the way.

How about we give this effort a little more publicity with an article about what you are doing on "The Beehive" at Freemason Information~Masonic Traveler and also likewise on Phoenixmasonry? I am open to writing such an article if you are game.

Please feel free to correspond with me at Phoenixmasonrydirector@gmail.com

Frederic L. Milliken
MWPHGLTX


----------



## towerbuilder7

I think that's an excellent idea Blake...............Bro Milliken and I have not met, but I am a fan of his site and ANY article he ever chooses to submit to our MWPHGLTX Quarterly Newsletter................Hope you and/or Bro Neumann correspond with him, and get that article done!!         BRO JONES


----------



## kosei

I plan on bringing it to the floor in June as well.





Cblack said:


> I doubt that the GLoTX will draft a resolution for visitation...it being the older GL and giving the MWPHGLOTX an opportunity the first time will wait for us to do it...the problem is that I don't think that anyone on our side has the balls to even bring it to the floor because they are afraid of being outcasted within the jurisdiction....but seeing and realising how important it is I plan on doing just that in June


----------



## Blake Bowden

Squire Bentley said:


> How about we give this effort a little more publicity with an article about what you are doing on "The Beehive" at Freemason Information~Masonic Traveler and also likewise on Phoenixmasonry? I am open to writing such an article if you are game.
> 
> Please feel free to correspond with me at Phoenixmasonrydirector@gmail.com
> 
> Frederic L. Milliken
> MWPHGLTX



Bro. Milliken, you've always been an inspiration and because of your labors, I've upgraded your account to a Premium Membership. Thank you Brother. In regards to publishing an article, I would fully support such action. There are many Brethren on BOTH sides who are supportive of extending visitation, but our respective Grand Lodges continue to downplay such action. You write an article in support, I'll push it out to every Freemason I can...


----------



## Michael Neumann

Squire Bentley said:


> How about we give this effort a little more publicity with an article about what you are doing on "The Beehive" at Freemason Information~Masonic Traveler and also likewise on Phoenixmasonry? I am open to writing such an article if you are game.
> 
> Please feel free to correspond with me at Phoenixmasonrydirector@gmail.com
> 
> Frederic L. Milliken
> MWPHGLTX



Whatever you need let me know and I will assist.


----------



## Blake Bowden

I personally emailed PGM Donny Broughton with questions regarding the Compact and of course, no response. To be fair, I also emailed current PH Grand Master Wilbert Curtis and the response was...nothing.

Let's continue shall we? I also emailed R.W. Jerry Martin (Deputy Grand Master). While he was Grand Orator, I spent countless hours *producing a video for his presentations*. Surely he responded right? No.

As a Texas Mason, if I have a question about the Craft and/or policies of Grand Lodge, I want answers. Just because you have a pretty apron or fancy name tag doesn't put you in a position to be above your fellow Brethren! You're in a position to answer to us and to lead the Craft during your tenure - not to be some elitist. It's obvious what this kind of mentality leads to, just look at the loss of membership we see each year.


----------



## tomasball

What questions do you need RW. Broughton to answer about the compact?


----------



## Blake Bowden

More than anything, it was an email to solicit an acknowledgement that he received it. I have the upmost respect for R.W. Broughton as he was at the front and center during the Compact so to get his input, even if it were to remain on the square, would be fantastic. Some questions I have:

Which Grand Lodge initiated contact first to pursue a "mutual recognition"?
What were the reasons for not extending to compact to include visitation?
Why do you believe nothing has transpired since the original compact was signed in 2007?
To the best of your knowledge, are you aware of any further meetings to discuss visitation between both M.W. Grand Lodges?
What were the most difficult issues faced during meetings prior to the compact signing?

Etc.


----------



## tomasball

I don't want to sound like I'm being personal here, but you seem to be presenting yourself like a journalist.  If I was a present or past officer, I would in no way be inclined to respond to an interrogation like that.  There are a lot of masons in Texas, and I'm sure our leadership all get a lot of mail criticizing their actions or asking for explanations.


----------



## Brent Heilman

tomasball said:


> I don't want to sound like I'm being personal here, but you seem to be presenting yourself like a journalist.  If I was a present or past officer, I would in no way be inclined to respond to an interrogation like that.  There are a lot of masons in Texas, and I'm sure our leadership all get a lot of mail criticizing their actions or asking for explanations.



Just my personal thoughts are that I highly doubt that is exactly the way Bro. Blake worded the email. In no way do I see those questions as critical of their leadership. It seems to me that they are more of a fact finding type of email. I wouldn't know of any other way to ask those questions. Any time you ask a series of questions it is almost always going to sound journalistic in nature. Even asking about someone's time on vacation can be taken that way if you want it to.


----------



## Mac

Plus someone has to ask these questions (in whatever format) or we can plan on remaining in this recognition limbo perpetually. 

It's time to take the next step. 


Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## Michael Neumann

Blake Bowden said:


> More than anything, it was an email to solicit an acknowledgement that he received it. I have the upmost respect for R.W. Broughton as he was at the front and center during the Compact so to get his input, even if it were to remain on the square, would be fantastic. Some questions I have:
> 
> Which Grand Lodge initiated contact first to pursue a "mutual recognition"?
> What were the reasons for not extending to compact to include visitation?
> Why do you believe nothing has transpired since the original compact was signed in 2007?
> To the best of your knowledge, are you aware of any further meetings to discuss visitation between both M.W. Grand Lodges?
> What were the most difficult issues faced during meetings prior to the compact signing?
> 
> Etc.



These are questions that every Mason touched by the compact would like answered. Each of us know there are undercurrents that we are unaware of, the answers to Bro. Blakes questions would provide much needed insight. My wife just authorized another $500 to the ad campaign... time to fire up FB and Twitter.


----------



## Michael Neumann

I have new information for everyone.... just kidding. The page is still up and we are still getting new likes and petitions are still being turned in but there has been no surface movement that I know of.


----------



## Michael Neumann

I am contemplating calling the secretaries of each GL in regards to the petition. I would like official input from each jurisdiction.


----------



## tomasball

sorry. deleted.  Misread previous post


----------



## widows son

I've looked on my GL website and can't find if we recognize PHA. I'm almost positive we do. If anyone can assist me it would be great. Also whether my GL recognizes PHA or not, I am in support of this. I'm not sure if there would be a point to me signing anything, put if I could I definitely would and will if possible. To all the brethren devoted to progress, may God bless you all.


----------



## Michael Neumann

tomasball said:


> sorry. deleted.  Misread previous post


Don't know what you initially stated but input is welcome, positive or otherwise. I would just like to get to the bottom of this issue so I can resolve it.


----------



## chrmc

Michael Neumann said:


> I am contemplating calling the secretaries of each GL in regards to the petition. I would like official input from each jurisdiction.



I think it's a very admirable effort, and it would be interesting to hear what replies you got. I'm unfortunately a pessimist on this subject and don't think you would get much, but that does certainly not mean it shouldn't be done. 
Call a couple of the bigger Grand Lodges and let's hear what they say.


----------



## Michael Neumann

widows son said:


> I've looked on my GL website and can't find if we recognize PHA. I'm almost positive we do. If anyone can assist me it would be great. Also whether my GL recognizes PHA or not, I am in support of this. I'm not sure if there would be a point to me signing anything, put if I could I definitely would and will if possible. To all the brethren devoted to progress, may God bless you all.


Here is a list from masonicinfo.com http://www.masonicinfo.com/grandlodges.htm


----------



## dfreybur

Michael Neumann said:


> Here is a list from masonicinfo.com http://www.masonicinfo.com/grandlodges.htm



North Carolina recognizes.  Excellent.  One step at a time.

Has anyone seen a list of US jurisdiction telling if they have returned to the worldwide standard of Stated meetings in the first degree?  I think nearly all have at this point.  It's a far less urgent issue than PHA recognition but until all have returned to the standard we still have that remaining fallout from the anti-Masonic movement of the 1840s to clean up.


----------



## widows son

Thx brother


----------



## Michael Neumann

Still seeing the random petition submitted. Though it has fallen to about 5 a month. Here is a great post from a young man on the Masonic Amity FB page. 

https://www.facebook.com/MasonicAmi...set=0&total_comments=10&notif_t=share_comment

June 2, 1988, Grand Master Richard A Claytor of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge, of Massachusetts sent a letter to the United Grand Lodge of England, stating in part that he was writing on behalf of some 300,000 Prince Hall Masons, 42 jurisdictions, 5000 Lodges, who trace their lineage to a Charter issued African Lodge # 459, on September 29, 1784, by the Grand Masters Command and signed by R. Holt, D.G.M., and witness by WM. White, GS: -Our legality has been proven many times over he stated and yet we are denied the full rights of Masonry; we have the only charter issued from the Mother Grand Lodge to this country and we are still not recognized as Masons and closed by stating “I humbly ask that you consider placing Prince Hall Masonry in your directory of free Masons”e of Massachusetts.
September 21, 1988, a reply was sent to Grand Master Richard A Claytor, stating, that your letter of June 2, 1988, has now been considered by our Board of General Purposes; as you may know, the main bone of contention, as far as this Grand Lodge is concerned, relates to the origin of the Prince Hall movement, descended from African Lodge #459 formed in Boston in 1784 and then numbered 459 on the roll of the Grand Lodge of England. The warrant, like any other warrant issued to a private Lodge, gave no power to the members of that Lodge to form other Lodges; also the policy of our Grand Lodge is to recognize not more that one Lodge as having Jurisdiction in any country, state or territory, therefore we cannot extend recognition to you, while we continue to recognize the State Grand Lodge of Massachusetts. I am sorry to reply in terms which will cause you disappointment.
Signed-(M.B.S. Higham).Grand Secretary.
The 73rd Annual Session of the Prince Hall Conference of Grand Masters was held in Nassau, Bahamas, May 12-15, 1992 and many items of interest were discussed including the subject of recognition: It was also disclosed that some Prince Hall Grand Lodges and State Grand Lodges were recognizing, and even be visiting each other.
M.W Grand Master Daniel Lunsford of the Jurisdiction of Washington stated that he had petitioned the United Grand Lodge of England for recognition and was informed that before reacting to his petition it would make contact with the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Massachusetts, (the Mother Jurisdiction of Prince Hall Masonry.)
Nicholas B. Locker was born on the island of Montserrat British West Indies and came to the United States of America in 1952, He was initiated a member of John J Smith Lodge #14 in 1974 and served as Worshipful Master in 1982.
After serving in several stations in the Grand Lodge, he was elected Most Worshipful Grand Master at the 201st Annual Session of the M.W. Prince Hall Grand Lodge, Jurisdiction of Massachusetts which was held in December 1992.
On January 15, 1993, the recognition process between the United Grand Lodge of England and the M.W Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Massachusetts took on a more serious and positive tone, as Grand Master Nicholas B. Locker received a letter and a recorded telephone message from Very Worshipful Brother Michael Higham, Grand Secretary of the United Grand Lodge of England. The call was returned on January 18, 1993 and the Grand Secretary expressed his desire to meet to discuss the possibility of recognition.
Grand Master Locker called a meeting of his Past Grand Masters at the home of Past Grand Master Andrew J Spears to brief them of the situation and seek their advice.
February 15, 1993, Grand Secretary Higham called to set a date for a meeting and stated he would come to Boston.ebruary 28, 1993, Grand Master Nicholas B Locker accompanied by his Deputy Grand Master Edgar R Mclean and Grand Historian Raymond T Coleman met with Grand Secretary Higham at the Park Plaza Hotel in Boston Massachusetts to discuss the possibility of recognition between the two Grand Lodges.
Grand Secretary Higham was brought up to date and made notes of the changes of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge, since the Charter was issued by the United Grand Lodge of England on September 29, 1784; this he needed to make a concise and factual report to his Board of General Purposes: The Grand Secretary insisted that Prince Hall return the Warrant #459 and seek reconsideration from the Grand Lodge of England to recharter another African Lodge, but Grand Master Locker made it clear that Prince Hall would not under any circumstances, consider any thing of that nature, that it traced its heritage through African Lodge # 459, warranted by the Grand Lodge of England and its position would not change; also the Prince Hall Grand Lodge is a regular and legitimate Grand Lodge and therefore should be recognized;. Grand Secretary Higham again stated that the main bone of contention as far as the Grand Lodge of England is concerned, relates to the origin of the Prince Hall movement:- The word regular / irregular became the key to the success or failure of the entire process.
April 7, 1993, Grand Master Locker received a letter, containing a position statement issued by the Grand Lodge of England, and this position statement was read at the Prince Hall Grand Masters Conference which was held in Somerset, New Jersey, in May 1993.
On October 20, 1993, Grand Master Locker sent a letter to the United Grand Lodge of England stating in part, “As Grand Master of the Mother Grand Lodge of Prince Hall Masons, I feel that it is incumbent on me to make every effort to bring closure to this matter in a manner that is acceptable and beneficial to both Grand Lodges and more particularly to the brethren we represent, but doubt a solution will be forthcoming in the near future, because of the difference of opinion, relative to the issue of regularity.”
May 1994, Grand Master Nicholas B Locker made a progress report at the Prince Hall Grand Masters Conference in Houston Texas.
August 25, 1994, Grand Secretary Higham called Grand Master Locker to say that he will be coming to Boston in September and will give him a call.
September 18, 1994, Grand Secretary Higham called from the Park Plaza Hotel in Boston Massachusetts, He stated, that his Board of General Purposes had found a way to move beyond the issue of irregularity and will make an announcement in the near future,
November 24, 1994, Grand Master Locker received written documents from Grand Secretary Higham, stating that a resolution will be considered by the United Grand Lodge of England at the December 14, 1994 Session, stating that, “not withstanding its unusualormation the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Massachusetts should be considered as regular and be recognized.”
December 11, 1994, Grand Master Locker made that announcement to his Grand Lodge in Session.
December 14, 1994, Resolution Approved.
The Grand Lodge of England’s news letter stated that this recognition applies only to the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Massachusetts, and applications for other Prince Hall Grand Lodges may follow and each must be considered on its merit.
The State Grand Lodge of Massachusetts was in Session at the time, and received word of the historical vote, and Grand Master David Lovering made the announcement to his Grand Lodge to a standing ovation.
December 16, 1994, Grand Master David Lovering sent a letter to Grand Master Nicholas B Locker, congratulating him and the Prince Hall Grand Lodge on this historical occasion and extended an invitation to meet.
December 23, 1994, Grand Master Nicholas B. Locker accompanied by Past Grand Masters Richard A Claytor and Chester R Isles met with Grand Master David Lovering and many of his Past Grand Masters in his office at the Masonic building on Tremont Street to celebrate the occasion.
December 27, 1994, Grand Master Nicholas B Locker installed his successor R.W. brother Edgar R McLean and completed his two year term as Grand Master.
Presently twenty seven (27) Prince Hall Grand Lodges have been recognized by the United Grand Lodge of England.


----------



## Blake Bowden

I'd like to know what the deal is. I've personally contacted BOTH Grand Masters of Texas, and neither will respond. I guess both are content living in a world we where recognize each other as regular Masons, but heaven forbid we actually sit in Lodge and labor together.


----------



## Michael Neumann

Blake Bowden said:


> I'd like to know what the deal is. I've personally contacted BOTH Grand Masters of Texas, and neither will respond. I guess both are content living in a world we where recognize each other as regular Masons, but heaven forbid we actually sit in Lodge and labor together.


I called both secretaries and never heard back. 

Both sides seem to maintain and underlying contempt for one another. Since this started I have seen gentlemen speak one way to me and then convey a completely different message to others. First time it happened was on a FB post the guy didn't know I could see, second time was here on base, I walked up on one of my 'close' PHA friends saying he would never sit in a "{profanity} white lodge". Really didn't know what to do so I tapped him on the shoulder to alert him to my presence, nodded at him, then walked away. WTH was that? 

Until everyone gets over themselves we are going to remain in this silly situation.


----------



## Cblack

Michael Neumann said:


> I called both secretaries and never heard back.
> 
> Both sides seem to maintain and underlying contempt for one another. Since this started I have seen gentlemen speak one way to me and then convey a completely different message to others. First time it happened was on a FB post the guy didn't know I could see, second time was here on base, I walked up on one of my 'close' PHA friends saying he would never sit in a "{profanity} white lodge". Really didn't know what to do so I tapped him on the shoulder to alert him to my presence, nodded at him, then walked away. WTH was that?
> 
> Until everyone gets over themselves we are going to remain in this silly situation.



There are some that still think that lodges should be segregated. I see it on my side (PHA) and it really sickens me. I should be in attendance at GL Session in June...If so, I will ask the questions and bring a motion to the floor to petition for modification of the current compact between our two GLs to include full visitation...I might even ask for dual membership...if the motions are defeated you all will be the first to know...Hey all I can do is try..If they pass then it will be in the hands of the GLoTX...Let's see who really wants it and who doesn't... 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Freemasonry mobile app


----------



## jpstarks

Whilst I agree with your sentiment, an individual brother sending a petition to the Grand Lodge of Texas won't do anything.  You need a proposal submitted by a member of Grand Lodge.  I've belonged to lodges in two states with full reciprocity.  Not much reciprocating happened, but a number of men who would have joined the PHA joined the regular lodges instead and the PHA lodges were not thrilled with that result.


----------



## Michael Neumann

Michael Neumann said:


> ... anyhow with the brilliant idea that Brother Vincent suggested. It is a very simple suggestion and most solutions are exactly that. http://www.freemasoninformation.com/2011/10/masonic-holidays/ here is a list of holidays we observe.
> 
> June 20th/21st – Saint John the Baptist Day / Summer Solstice
> June 24th, 1717 – Founding of the United Grand Lodge of England.
> 
> We have two BIG opportunites on the horizon. We can make this a TX thing OR we can make this a National thing... I might need some help with the Facebook ads this time. I have already thrown over 1K at the petition and my wife is getting a little irritated



On another thread a young man had quite an idea. It might need some review but he mentioned the MS and PHA guys hosting and UNOFFICIAL community event such as a cook off. There are a couple events coming up that would be a great opportunity to gather public interest in Masonry and show unity between us. It would be nice to see this happen in TX but my sights are set higher, I want it national. Even an ad set at $1 or $2 a day leading up to it would gather much support.

A brief ‘How To’ on FaceBook Ads.



Notice the cog (gear) in the top right corner of your screen… click on it.
Click ‘Advertise’
Click ‘Create an Ad’
Click ‘Search by URL’ and paste www.facebook.com/MasonicAmity
Click ‘Promote Page Posts’
Check the box ‘Keep my ad up-to-date by automatically promoting my most recent post ’
In the box for ‘Precise Interests’ paste these keywords ( you can always add more) #freemasonry  #United Grand Lodge of England  #Grand Lodge of Texas  #History of Freemasonry  #York Rite  #Scottish Rite  #Prince Hall Freemasonry #Continental Freemasonry in North America
Set your budget and place your order
On the Amity page I am going to spend the run up to our cook off promoting the event and driving people to place the event on their calendar.


----------



## dfreybur

Cblack said:


> ...I might even ask for dual membership...



MWPHAGLofTX is a single affiliation jurisdiction.  You can only belong to one lodge according to their rules.  The buzzword you want to use is "associate membership".  It's their way to implement what would otherwise be called dual affiliation.  To me it sounded like a word game to establish a loophole but whatever you call it if it works it's the way to go.  After the fake recognition without visitation gets corrected to real recognition with visitation.


----------



## Michael Neumann

If I set up a https://www.thunderclap.it/  how many people will sign? Perhaps Blake would set one up to announce a Bridge Builders meeting or something of the like. The APP links into all of your social connections and once a preset number of supporters is reach blasts out a message on twitter and Face Book announcing the event and providing a message. Right now Fire Fox is using it to alert people about its upcoming mobile platform.


----------



## Blake Bowden

Bump and featuring it as an article on our homepages, apps and social networks.


----------



## Blake Bowden

Bump and featuring it as an article on our homepages, apps and social networks.


----------



## Raymond Walters

jpstarks said:


> Whilst I agree with your sentiment, an individual brother sending a petition to the Grand Lodge of Texas won't do anything.  You need a proposal submitted by a member of Grand Lodge.  I've belonged to lodges in two states with full reciprocity.  Not much reciprocating happened, but a number of men who would have joined the PHA joined the regular lodges instead and the PHA lodges were not thrilled with that result.




My observation on your words is this... PHA leadership in some jurisdictions has driven membership away in my opinion. Insecurity appears to be a major culprit to thwarting goodwill & cooperation within a Grand Lodge, and I have observed it many times myself over the years.

No one wishes to belong to any organization that doesn't cause you to feel as if you are a part of it. 

No one wants to feel that they are being manipulated or controlled in any way to satisfy an agenda that is morally or spiritually questionable.

An intelligent, progressive-minded person seeks to interact with other intelligent, progressive people.

Lastly, a qualified individual should have a choice as to what Masonic Grand Lodge he should petition, and it should be his choice alone. When I first sought to petition, what was foremost in my mind was how does anyone dictate to me where I should petition? I didn't like that view in 1988, and I dislike it in 2014.

If Freemasonry follows it own regulations, any petitioner should be treated fairly and a decision based on his merit alone... not another's un-judicious opinion that falls outside of those regulations.


----------

