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



## thenewyorker83

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


----------



## SivadSemaj

A truly momentous occasion.


----------



## Castro81

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...


----------



## Castro81

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


----------



## Winter

Baby steps, Brother. We'll get there. 

Transmitted via R5 astromech using Tapatalk Galactic


----------



## Castro81

Winter said:


> Baby steps, Brother. We'll get there.
> 
> Transmitted via R5 astromech using Tapatalk Galactic


 I know, but its been too long already. By this rate, i maybe in the celestial lodge before they do full recognition....


----------



## Glen Cook

Castro81 said:


> 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

Castro81 said:


> 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

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

thenewyorker83 said:


> 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

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

Mebbe what we should be demanding is "recognition with privileges"...


----------



## Winter

Bill Lins said:


> Mebbe what we should be demanding is "recognition with privileges"...


What would those privileges be? Conferal of degrees?

Transmitted via R5 astromech using Tapatalk Galactic


----------



## Glen Cook

Bill Lins said:


> Mebbe what we should be demanding is "recognition with privileges"...


Given that visitation is not a right in many jurisdictions, why is this critical?


----------



## Bill Lins

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

Bill Lins said:


> 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

Castro81 said:


> 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

Castro81 said:


> 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

Glen Cook said:


> 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.


----------



## Glen Cook

Castro81 said:


> What i mean by “black lodges” im referring to the predominantly black members of those lodges.


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.


----------



## Hiran C

Winter said:


> 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


Agree things are getting better brother. It’s just Masonry in general. Things take TIME and sometimes a lot of it.


----------



## Sdub291

Castro81 said:


> 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.



Some on the mainstream side believe that prince hall members are not free born mostly the older generation of MS..slowly some of the older brothers are waking up and going back threw the archives of masonry 


Sent from my iPhone using My Freemasonry mobile app


----------



## Rod357

thenewyorker83 said:


> 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
> 
> 
> I know this post is old but its my first time seeing it. I am a PHA MM raised in Colorado under MWPHGL of CO,WY,UT and I recently moved to Florida. I had no idea there was PHA and  PHA Union Lodges here so I'm a little confused. I want to affiliate with a lodge here but I want to know the history of these two different PHA organizations before I reach out to a local lodge.


----------



## MRichard

http://www.mwuglflorida.org/
PHA is Union in Florida


----------



## Glen Cook

MRichard said:


> http://www.mwuglflorida.org/
> PHA is Union in Florida


And to add to my brother’s note, there is only PHA in each state, emphasis on the A.


----------



## Rod357

Glen Cook said:


> And to add to my brother’s note, there is only PHA in each state, emphasis on the A.


https://www.tmwphglafamfl.com
http://www.mwuglflorida.org
Ok so why are there 2 PH grand lodges in Florida should have been my question, I guess.


----------



## Winter

Rod357 said:


> https://www.tmwphglafamfl.com
> http://www.mwuglflorida.org
> Ok so why are there 2 PH grand lodges in Florida should have been my question, I guess.



Because one is not legitimate.

https://thephylaxis.org/bogus/education.php



> Many bogus groups came from disgruntled members of the Prince Hall Fraternity such as the Most Worshipful Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Florida A. F. & A. M., who many often mistake for a regular Prince Hall Grand Lodge. IT IS NOT A PRINCE HALL AFFILIATE GRAND LODGE IN ANY FORM OR FASHION! IT IS ANOTHER BOGUS GRAND LODGE! This Grand Lodge erected herself from the Most Union Grand Lodge of Florida (PHA). This Bogus group established itself in the early 1900’s


----------



## Glen Cook

Winter said:


> Because one is not legitimate.
> 
> https://thephylaxis.org/bogus/education.php


And to also add to this brother’s note, there is no regular Prince Hall AF&AM in the United States (cf. Liberia).


----------



## MRichard

Mississippi is similar. The PHA grand lodge is Stringer. I would imagine that the clandestine grand lodges incorporated first in those states although I am not familiar with the history of either.


----------



## Rod357

Winter said:


> Because one is not legitimate.
> 
> https://thephylaxis.org/bogus/education.php


thank you brother for the clarification.


----------

