Basic Principles for Grand Lodge Regularity & Recognition

REGULARITY OF PRACTICE, EXCLUSIVE TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION and GLP RECOGNITION.

Yes, since 2006. Based on our Constitution, any unrecognized and unauthorized formation of any of our lodges into a Grand Lodge is CLANDESTINE. The Independent Grand Lodge of the Philippine Islands (IGLPI) could arguably meet the regularity of origin, having been organized by three regular lodges and having regularity of practice as their ritual is taken from the GLP. However, it fails on the exclusive territorial jurisdiction requirement (MLB Part V, No.1, Letter B, No. 5), and the recognition requirement of our Grand jurisdiction and of other jurisdictions considered regular by the GLP.

Grand Lodge of Modern Mixed Masons (GLMMM) is a co-Masonry jurisdiction based in England that chartered lodges in the Philippines. Much is unknown about this new jurisdiction, but since we know that Co-Masonry (They accept men and women) is not recognized by the Grand Lodge of the Philippines, it is safe to assume that they are CLANDESTINE.

It is a clear violation of the Third Degree Charge which is further reinforced by MLB Article XVII Membership, Rights & Obligations Sec. 20 which states: “No Master Mason shall hold Masonic intercourse or membership in any illegal or clandestine lodge nor communicate Masonically with any clandestine Masons.” Although we might think that we can somehow be careful in fraternizing with clandestine Masons, and not delve into any Masonic discussion with them, I personally ask: why take the risk and subject yourself to possible violation of your OB? It is true we can be friends with them, but fraternizing under the banner of Freemasonry is another matter.

Credits to VW Teddy Kalaw IV, SGL of the GLP, VW Benny Ty (1), Bro. Joey Villegas (202), VW Ian Galarosa (181) and WB Larry Carbonel (116) for their valuable assistance in the completion of these 2 articles. *Principles of Recognition adopted from Conference of Grand Masters of North America.

This is first and foremost. The GL must be authorized by a Recognized Grand Lodge or must be formed by at least three regularly constituted Lodges holding charters from Recognized Grand Lodges (MLB Part V, No.1, Letter A) and can eventually trace its origins back to the three mother Grand Lodges of the world namely: United Grand Lodge of England, Grand Lodge of Scotland and Grand Lodge of Ireland. This is where a GL receives its Masonic Authority. A GL that lacks Regularity of Origin is considered CLANDESTINE.

This means that the GL adheres to the Ancient Landmarks of the Craft. Basic requirements (MLB Part V, No.1, Letter B) being 1) Belief in a Supreme Being; 2) The Three Great Lights of Masonry especially the Volume of Sacred Law a required part of the furniture of the Lodge; 3) Men Only; 4) GL is Sovereign (and the Grandmaster when it is not in session) over the three Craft degrees and there is no higher authority to which they must adhere in the workings of the Craft (Continental Masonic obediences consider the Supreme Council of 33rd degree Masons as higher authority.) If a Grand Lodge meets the Regularity of Origin test, but fails to meet Regularity of Practice, they are considered IRREGULAR.The Grand Orient de France and LeDroit Humain are two examples.

This is a primarily (although not exclusively) American doctrine where a GL must be Sovereign over Masonry in its Territory (MLB Part V, No.1, Letter A / Pro 1926) or the GL must have an agreement of Amity with other Recognized GLs in the same Territory. A GL that has Regularity of Origin and Regularity of Practice, but lacks amity with other GLs in its territory is called UNRECOGNIZED.

The GLP Constitution states that “The words “clandestine lodge” and ‘clandestine Mason” shall refer to a fraternity, organization, or association and a member thereof, which is not recognized by the Grand Lodge and uses the word “Masonic” as part of its name or adopts the square and compasses or any Masonic emblem, regalia, symbol or ritual without authority of the Grand Lodge of the Philippines”. (Pro 1924, 1926)