# A.f & a.m? F.&a.m?



## JustinScott

I know F.&A.M. is free and accepted mason but what is the other one and what is the difference?  Are they others besides these two and what are there differences?


----------



## crono782

I had this same question last week and found this:
http://www.masonic-lodge-of-education.com/af-and-am-vs-f-and-am-states.html


----------



## widows son

*A.f &amp; a.m? F.&amp;a.m?*

Ancient free and accepted masons, it goes back to the schism between the ancients and the moderns, google it you will find what you are looking for


----------



## cjapgar

A.F & A.M. is Ancient Free and Accepted Masons. South Carolina is the only one that I know of that is neither of the two. They are A.F.M, Ancient Free Masons. Through my travels visiting both A.F. & A.M., F. & A.M and A.F.M, I have noted only minute differences in the work. The fellowship however has always been outstanding as I thought it would be.


----------



## widows son

*A.f &amp; a.m? F.&amp;a.m?*

Never heard of AFM. Any references I can check out on the subject?


----------



## Bill Lins

cjapgar said:


> South Carolina is the only one that I know of that is neither of the two. They are A.F.M, Ancient Free Masons.



The Grand Lodge of the District of Columbia is F.A.A.M.


----------



## Hndrx

AF&AM, F&AM, etc. is really just a difference in naming between various states in the US and between various "Mainstream" and Prince Hall Grand Lodges in different parts of the country.  There isn't a real "practical" difference based on the name alone.


----------



## martin

*A.f &amp; a.m? F.&amp;a.m?*

Here in Canada A.F.A.M  as a regular lodges does not Recognize irregular lodges ( F & AM ) usually mix lodges, woman lodges or lodges that practice different rites


----------



## bupton52

*Re: A.f &amp; a.m? F.&amp;a.m?*



martin said:


> Here in Canada A.F.A.M  as a regular lodges does not Recognize irregular lodges ( F & AM ) usually mix lodges, woman lodges or lodges that practice different rites



What are some of those irregular F & AM lodges? The reason that I ask is because here in the States, most of the irregular lodges use A.F. & A.M.


----------



## martin

*A.f &amp; a.m? F.&amp;a.m?*

Not saying they doing anything wrong we as a regular lodges we don't see them as a masons


----------



## daddyrich

*A.f &amp; a.m? F.&amp;a.m?*

What F & A.M. Lodges are considered irregular?


----------



## scialytic

Hndrx said:


> AF&AM, F&AM, etc. is really just a difference in naming between various states in the US and between various "Mainstream" and Prince Hall Grand Lodges in different parts of the country.  There isn't a real "practical" difference based on the name alone.



Most of it comes down to the history of the Grand Lodge line. A.F.&A.M. were the "Ancients" and F.&A.M. were the "Moderns" in 1751-1813 when England had two Grand Lodges. 

South Carolina is very interesting. They had two Grand Lodges: Free and Accepted Masons and Ancient York Masons. The AYM quickly outnumbered the Moderns and they eventually ended up in court. Ultimately they merged and became The Grand Lodge of Ancient Free Masons.

I couldn't find the origins of the FAAM for DC. I'm sure it is interesting. Anyone know?


Here's a table I found while looking. Source cite is listed below.

AF and AM vs F and AM States... vs AFM States... vs FAAM States


--------------------------------------------------


AF & AM States


AF & AM - Ancient Free and Accepted Masons


These 24 AF & AM states include:  CO, CT, DE, ID, IL, IA, KS, ME, MD, MA, MN, MO, MT, NE, NM, NC, ND, OK, OR, SD, TX, VA, WV, WY.


F & A M States:


F & AM - Free and Accepted Masons


These 25 F & AM states include:  AL, AK, AR, AZ, CA, FL, GA, HI, IN, KY, LA, MI, MS, NH, NJ, NV, NY, OH, PA, RI, TN, UT, VT, WA, WI.


All Prince Hall lodges are also F. & AM


AFM - Ancient Free Masons

AFM State: SC

FAAM - Free And Accepted Masons

FAAM District: District of Columbia


Source: http://www.masonic-lodge-of-education.com/af-and-am-vs-f-and-am-states.html#ixzz28G3kAQoh


----------



## widows son

I though they recognize FAM, In new brunswick a lot of lodges are FAM


----------



## scialytic

It all depends on where the charter was from and how it ties back. They may all be Recognized as Regular. That's why you have to look at the charter (now you can do most all of the research online). (I suppose they could also be decreed as clandestine with a perfectly sound charter, so you'd have to check with your Grand Lodge since that is the body that you are bound by.) Where did the Grand Lodge receive their charter, or the Lodges that formed the Grand Lodge. There are also lists of clandestine lodges online in various places. Pick one of the NB Lodges and research it back...that would be a pretty cool exercise.


----------



## widows son

*A.f &amp; a.m? F.&amp;a.m?*

Thx I def will!


----------



## towerbuilder7

I would strongly advise you to check some additonal resources Brother, before you make continued judgments on F&AM Brethren in general.......There are REGULAR AND RECOGNIZED Mainstream and Prince Hall Affiliated Lodges here in the United States.   26 of the 50 States in the Union have Mainstream Grand Lodges that are styled Free and Accepted, while ALL of the Prince Hall Affiliated Grand Lodges here in the United States are styled Free and Accepted.     Each of these Lodges mentioned above are recognized by the United Grand Lodge of England as being REGULAR IN ORIGIN.

I'm not sure where you received your information about F&AM Lodges here in America being Irregular.    We do NOT accept Women, and each of the Lodges, both Mainstream and Prince Hall Affiiated practice the Rites in Regular fashion as prescribed in the Landmarks and Ritual from their Grand Body of Origin and Lineage.   If you desire more LIGHT on this issue, feel free to contact me on this thread.   I need to make sure the Brethren in Canada are receiving the PROPER LIGHT up North, near the North Pole.  The Lodges of questionable Lineage and Origin are the Predominantly African American "John G Jones" AF&AM "Grand Lodges" here in America.   They are NOT recognized by the UGLE, nor either Mainstream or Prince Hall Grand Body in the US.



Bro Vincent C. Jones, Sr., Lodge Chaplain, Bayou City Lodge #228
Prince Hall Affiliation, Free and Accepted Masonry, Houston, Texas
Most Worshipful Prince Hall Grand Lodge of TEXAS, Est. 1878


----------



## JustinScott

towerbuilder7 said:


> I would strongly advise you to check some additonal resources Brother, before you make continued judgments on F&AM Brethren in general.......There are REGULAR AND RECOGNIZED Mainstream and Prince Hall Affiliated Lodges here in the United States.   26 of the 50 States in the Union have Mainstream Grand Lodges that are styled Free and Accepted, while ALL of the Prince Hall Affiliated Grand Lodges here in the United States are styled Free and Accepted.     Each of these Lodges mentioned above are recognized by the United Grand Lodge of England as being REGULAR IN ORIGIN.
> 
> I'm not sure where you received your information about F&AM Lodges here in America being Irregular.    We do NOT accept Women, and each of the Lodges, both Mainstream and Prince Hall Affiiated practice the Rites in Regular fashion as prescribed in the Landmarks and Ritual from their Grand Body of Origin and Lineage.   If you desire more LIGHT on this issue, feel free to contact me on this thread.   I need to make sure the Brethren in Canada are receiving the PROPER LIGHT up North, near the North Pole.  The Lodges of questionable Lineage and Origin are the Predominantly African American "John G Jones" AF&AM "Grand Lodges" here in America.   They are NOT recognized by the UGLE, nor either Mainstream or Prince Hall Grand Body in the US.
> 
> 
> 
> Bro Vincent C. Jones, Sr., Lodge Chaplain, Bayou City Lodge #228
> Prince Hall Affiliation, Free and Accepted Masonry, Houston, Texas
> Most Worshipful Prince Hall Grand Lodge of TEXAS, Est. 1878




This is what I was thinking.... so F.&A.M. are legitimate?


----------



## CajunTinMan

Some of it is just semantics.  Example: Texas recieved it's charter from Louisiana.  Texas is AF&AM and Louisiana is F&AM....


----------



## bupton52

JustinScott said:


> This is what I was thinking.... so F.&A.M. are legitimate?



I would say yes, but what is more important is that we don't get caught up in the letters. If each of us familiarizes ourselves with which GLs our jurisdiction has amity with and know exactly what GLs are regular (All GL of State, MWPHGL of State, MW Stringer GL of MS, and the MW Union GL of FL) we won't have to worry about who has which letters. IMO


----------



## bupton52

*Re: A.f &amp; a.m? F.&amp;a.m?*



martin said:


> Not saying they doing anything wrong we as a regular lodges we don't see them as a masons



It just seems misleading to say that F&AM GLs are irregular and that is just not the case. The letters truly don't determine regularity.


----------



## daddyrich

*A.f &amp; a.m? F.&amp;a.m?*

I was wondering this, myself. I am a Master in my Lodge, which is F&AM. We have a great history and receive many travelling bretheren. Maybe this irregularity is mostly confined to Canada? At least insofar as Free & Accepted Masons are concerned.


----------



## widows son

*A.f &amp; a.m? F.&amp;a.m?*

What do you mean the brethren in Canada receive the proper light? are you implying that we are doing things wrong? Most of Canada is AFAM


----------



## scialytic

There is clearly a misunderstanding. Surely nobody meant to say Canadian Lodges are irregular. I'm sure there are some, just like in the U.S. The designation of F&AM, AF&AM, etc. is only an indication of their historical roots. The exception is with Prince Hall Affilliated Lodges which are always F&AM (again, historical). The regularity of any Lodge is universally dependent on its lineage to the UGLE (or predicate Grand Lodge), Recognition/affiliation with its immediate Grand Lodge, and regularity of Work (landmarks, rites, etc.). 

Thus, nobody on this forum could know whether any of these Lodges are irregular without specific knowledge about the lodges, their Grand Lodges, and their history. So let's chill...and think happy thoughts. Happy, happy...joy...joy!


----------



## widows son

*A.f &amp; a.m? F.&amp;a.m?*

Lol. Im sorry if that came out hostile, that wasn't the tone I wanted to convey, and I apologize for that. But I'm not too familiar with other GL jurisdictions in Canada but the GL of AFAM in the province of Ontario has it lineage back to UGLE, Niagara on the lake lodge #1 eventually moved to Hamilton and became the grand lodge


----------



## scialytic

:5:

Blame Canada!!!


----------



## Michael Neumann

[h=1]*What is the 
difference between AF&AM and F&AM Lodges?*[/h]
[h=4]by Roger M. Firestone[/h]

After the foundation of the first Grand Lodge in England in 1717, a rival 
Grand Lodge arose less than two decades later, calling itself the Antients (or 
Ancients), whereby it intended to assert greater authenticity than the rival 
"modern" Grand Lodge. The Antients were also known as the Athol Masons, from 
their first Grand Master, the Duke of Athol. Some authors (e.g., Carl Claudy) 
say the Antients were schismatic--i.e., had split off from the "modern" Grand 
Lodge; others (e.g., Allen Roberts) of more recent vintage say that the Antients 
were founded independently by Lodges deriving from Scottish and Irish traditions 
who were excluded by the English "moderns." 

These competing English Grand Lodges, along with Grand Lodges established in 
Scotland and Ireland, issued charters for Lodges in the American colonies into 
the latter half of the 18th century, until the American Revolutionary War led to 
the ties between the colonies and the mother country being severed. Long after 
that event, in 1813 (when the two countries were again at war, in fact), the 
rival English Grand Lodges amalgamated to form the United Grand Lodge of 
England, which is the governing body of English Freemasonry to this day. 

Meanwhile, in the new United States of America, Grand Lodges were organized 
separately in each state, some as offspring of Provincial Grand Lodges and some 
as self-declared independent Grand Lodges (e.g., Virginia). These Grand Lodges 
comprised Lodges whose charters had been issued by both the Antient and "modern" 
Grand Lodges in England (as well as a few Scottish and Irish constitution 
Lodges). The designation of whether a Grand Lodge was Free and Accepted or 
Ancient Free and Accepted was therefore almost an arbitrary choice, based 
perhaps on who had a bit more political power when the new Grand Lodge was 
formed. 

In particular, one cannot conclude anything significant about the nature of 
the ritual used by a Grand Lodge as to its Antient or "modern" content, based 
only on the designation as F&AM or AF&AM. Many Grand Lodges use an 
amalgamation of the forms, and it would take detailed study (never having been 
done to my knowledge) to determine the precise provenance of each American Grand 
Lodge's ritual contents. It does appear that Pennsylvania may adhere most 
closely to the work of the Antients, while a northern tier of states, running 
from Connecticut through Minnesota and perhaps farther west, preserves the 
"modern" ritual most closely. In those states where a ritual cipher is 
permitted, which seems to be more a characteristic of the "moderns," the 
incorporation of changes to the ritual occur with much lower frequency (a fairly 
obvious observation). An example is the phrase "any be due," which is 
synonymously rendered "aught be due" in the apparently "modern" jurisdictions: 
The substitution of a common word ("any") for an archaic one ("aught") is a 
natural evolution of an oral tradition, while the reverse substitution virtually 
never occurs in oral transmission. The states with a printed ritual cipher have 
maintained "aught," while "any" has appeared in those states eschewing such 
written aids. 

Incidentally, there are two jurisdictions which use neither F&AM nor 
AF&AM: The District of Columbia uses FAAM, and South Carolina uses AFM. 
Again, these are distinctions without any real difference. 

Various suppositions are made about "four-letter" Lodges vs. "three-letter" 
Lodges and relationships to Prince Hall (PHA) Masonry and issues of recognition, 
but these are entirely unfounded.
http://www.themasonictrowel.com/Articles/General/lodge_files/difference_between_lodges.htm


----------



## martin

*A.f &amp; a.m? F.&amp;a.m?*

Hahaha is funny reading all the answers trying really hard to explains who's right or who's not every1 base there answer in American history but they forgot that in the rest if the world is totally different of wut u guys think , anyways in the end to tell u the true I think AF.AM , F.AM, AFM ir whatever it is we r all masona and thats it , we have to be tolerant to each other we have to respect every1 ideas that's wut masonry is ,but 1 question make everi1 crazy , come on guys lets show wut mason really are


----------



## daddyrich

*A.f &amp; a.m? F.&amp;a.m?*

That would be all well and good, if there were nit penalties for attempting Masonic communication w/ a member of a clandestine/irregular Lodge. I've always tried to maintain that we all have common ground, but from what I have seen and read they are every bit as hostile to our ways as we are proscribed to feeling about theirs. There are differences, some glaring and others slight. I do wish there were a way to rectify this as such but it doesn 't appear to be forthcoming.


----------



## towerbuilder7

Bro Widow's Son, please allow me to explain..........If you re-read my response, it simply stated that I wanted to clarify the legitimate origin of F&AM Lodges here in America, so that we ensure you Brothers up North who have any misconceptions or concerns about our legitimacy or regularity are receiving the proper and accurate LIGHT (information) about F&AM Lodges...........I expounded on your comment, in order to create some understanding...................


Bro Vincent C. Jones, Sr., Lodge Chaplain, Bayou City Lodge #228
Prince Hall Affiliation, Free and Accepted Masonry, Houston, Texas
Most Worshipful Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Texas, Est. 1878


----------



## scialytic

I'm familiar with how things developed in the US. I may do some more research on other countries as well. Canada and Mexico had heavy French and Spanish (respectively) influence at the origin of what became their current countries. I'd be interested to see how Light spread there. My arrogant American self wants to believe it came from/through us...but highly doubt that. I think I've found something to keep me occupied (aside fom memory work).


----------



## widows son

*A.f &amp; a.m? F.&amp;a.m?*

Bro. Towerbuilder7.  I don't think there's any issue with recognizing legitimacy here in Canada as all masons who trace their lineage back to the UGLE are recognized. I am aware that F&AM are legitimate as well as PHA. We have the same information you do on the subject. I'm not sure if there are any PHA lodges in Canada, but we are aware of PHA and if they are recognized legally by UGLE then they are brothers. No clarification needed brother


----------



## CajunTinMan

Touchy subject. Wouldn't it be great if someone who had access to a list of grand lodges that are recognized as regular would post it.


----------



## BryanMaloney

http://www.ugle.org.uk/about-ugle/recognised-foreign-grand-lodges/


----------



## CajunTinMan

Good deal Brother. That should make things a little simpler.


----------



## CajunTinMan

From 1751 to 1813, there were actually 2 Grand Lodges in England. The difference in AF and AM vs F and AM states goes back to a disagreement between these 2 Grand Lodges in London at that time. 
One group was called the "Moderns", but was actually the older of the 2 English Grand Lodges. The other group was called the "Antients", which became the "Ancients" in AF and AM.

Due to this disagreement, the 2 groups broke into separate Grand Lodges. The disagreement was later healed around 1880, but by that time, there were lodges and Grand Lodges all over the United States that were descended from one group or the other, and so each group kept their corresponding initials with which they were formed, (which is the reason for which there are small differences within different states' ritual wording and Grand Lodge By-Laws and procedures).
Most Grand Lodges in the U.S. recognize each other and treat each other's members as valid Masons.
Also, all of the U.S. Grand Lodges recognize (and are recognized by) the official Grand Lodges of England, Ireland, Scotland and the Grand Lodges in most of Europe, Asia, Africa, South America, Thailand, India, etc

[h=3]AF & AM States[/h]*AF & AM *- Ancient Free and Accepted MasonsThese 24 AF & AM states include:  CO, CT, DE, ID, IL, IA, KS, ME, MD, MA, MN, MO, MT, NE, NM, NC, ND, OK, OR, SD, TX, VA, WV, WY.​[h=4]F & A M States:[/h]*F & AM* - Free and Accepted MasonsThese 25 F & AM states include:  AL, AK, AR, AZ, CA, FL, GA, HI, IN, KY, LA, MI, MS, NH, NJ, NV, NY, OH, PA, RI, TN, UT, VT, WA, WI.All Prince Hall lodges are also F. & A.M.​[h=4]AFM State:[/h]*AFM* - Ancient Free MasonsThere is 1 AFM state:  SC    ​[h=4]FAAM District:[/h]*FAAM* - Free And Accepted MasonsThe District of Columbia is F.A.A.M​


----------



## tom268

scialytic said:


> I'm familiar with how things developed in the US. I may do some more research on other countries as well.


In all of Scandinavia, the grand lodges work the Swedish Rite, that is neither AF&AM, F&AM or whatever. The oldest Grand Lodge in Germany is the Grand National Mother Lodge "3 World Globes", again without letters. In France, Italy and Spain, grand lodges are usually called Grand Orients, and as the Grand Orient de France became irregular a long time ago, most "GO" bodies in Europe are irregular too. Exceptions: The Grand East of the Netherlands.

But regularity is a tricky thing and comes with too many exceptions to make a rule. The only way to determine, if a lodge or GL is considered regular, to adress your own GL and ask. For example: I had a chat with a brother from Greece. He is from the National Grand Lodge of Greece, recognized by many states, including the GL of Scotland. He was very confused as I treated him as irregular. My GL recognizes the Grand Lodge of Greece, as does the UGLoE.
So, what could happen? We cannot meet in lodge in Greece or Germany, but we could sit in lodge in Scotland, without harming our obligations.

The question of regularity is far from being easily answered.


----------



## jwhoff

BryanMaloney said:


> http://www.ugle.org.uk/about-ugle/recognised-foreign-grand-lodges/



Lodge of Texas
Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Texas & Jurisdictions

Gentlemen, 

I couldn't resist copying this from the UGLE list of "recognized" GL jurisdictions.  

_Qui sas alguendia, no say_


----------

