"THE FIRST IN RECOGNITION"
Recounted
by Lewis Myrick, Sr. P.G.M., P.H.
|
 On October 14, 1989, history was made in the world of Free Masonry. The Most Worshipful Prince Hall Grand Lodge F. & A.M. of Connecticut, Inc., and the Grand Lodge A.F. & A.M. of Connecticut both voted to recognize one another as legitimate Masonic bodies and to permit inter-visitation. The process of recognition began at the 200th Annual Communication of the Grand Lodge A.F. & A. M. of Connecticut, on March 29, 1989. I received a telephone call from then Most Worshipful Grand Master Gail N. Smith informing me that the Grand Lodge A. F. & A. M. of Connecticut had passed a resolution requesting recognition from the Most Worshipful Prince Hall Grand lodge F. & A. M. of Connecticut. This resolution was written and presented by M.W. Bro. Gail Linnell Smith, Past Grand Master and is as follows: "Whereas - Eminent and distinguished
scholars and several in-depth Whereas - Eminent and distinguished
members of the Grand Whereas - The doctrine of exclusive
jurisdiction is a myth, Whereas - Division among Men and
Masons claiming to practice Therefore - Be it resolved that
this Grand Lodge, Ancient Free And be it further resolved that
the Grand Master This resolution was accepted and referred to the Committee on Fraternal Relations with instructions to present a report with a recommendation at the next communication of this Grand Lodge, A.F. & A.M. on October 14, 1989. "There was a standing ovation by the Brethren in support of this resolution which authorized the Grand Master to appoint a Committee to work jointly with Prince Hall toward mutual recognition." On behalf of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge I congratulated M.W. Bro. Gail Nelson Smith on the courageous step taken by the Grand Lodge of Connecticut, A.F & A.M. However, I informed M.W. Bro. Smith I would have to discuss this resolution with the line officers before committing the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Connecticut. The line officers at the time were: Deputy Grand Master Thaddeus Holman, Senior Grand Warden Michael S. Bivans, Junior Grand Warden, Robert Williamson, and Grand Master Lewis Myrick, Sr. After several hours of discussion regarding recognition of A.F. & A.M. in Connecticut, it was decided that we should move forward. But before going forward, we had several concerns that had to be addressed. The greatest concern was that of merger. Webster's definition of merge is" to lose or cause to lose identity by being absorbed, swallowed up, or combined; to unite indistinguishably." This was unacceptable then as it is not acceptable today. We are as proud of our history as they are of theirs. How many "Regular Grand Lodges" could withstand the scrutiny that Prince Hall has been subjected to? According to Masonic history, not very many would be considered "Regular" if the same rules were applied as used against Prince Hall. The next concern was that of demit and dual membership of our Caucasian Brethrens into Prince Hall Lodges. The latter was easy to resolve because we do allow dual membership. Demitting was cause for immense discussion. After several hours we decided against demitting between the two bodies for fear of becoming another Alpha Lodge No. 116 (NJ). Perhaps this might shed a little light on "partial recognition" that some Grand Lodges and certain writers have alluded to. We were concerned about how much and what impact would this step have on our standing in the Prince Hall family. We were very aware of the strong feelings against the recognition of "Regular Grand Lodges" by Prince Hall Lodges. This concern required several days of discussion and soul searching to decide if we were willing to take such a step as this. The questions that had to be answered were very important to us and to Prince Hall Masonry. Were we willing to be outcast? Would we be able to accept the criticism for taking this step? Were we willing to accept the possibility of some Prince Hall Grand Lodges withdrawing recognition of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Connecticut? These and other questions and what we thought would be best for Connecticut had to be answered before moving forward. We, in Connecticut, decided that we were willing to be outcasts, able to accept criticism and accept the withdrawal of recognition from out Sister Jurisdictions if need be in order to practice the true meanings of Freemasonry. At the Conference of Grand Masters of the northeast region in April 1990, two of the questions that we were concerned with came to the surface. First, were the feelings that Connecticut had sold out Prince Hall Masonry to the "white man" and that we had turned our back to the "black man". That most Prince Hall Grand Lodges did not approve of the actions of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Connecticut. At the Conference of Grand Masters, Prince Hall Masons held in Boston, Massachusetts in May 1990, we again, came under attack from several Prince Hall Grand Lodges. We informed the Conference that we, as a Grand lodge, have the right to recognize any Grand Lodge that we might so choose. And no other Grand lodge can dictate to the Grand Lodge of Connecticut who they can or cannot recognize. To our pleasant surprise we had more support than we had opposition. An A.F. & A.M. Committee, Prince Hall, was appointed by then Grand Master Lewis Myrick, Sr., with Most Worshipful Brother Preston L. Pope, Past Grand Master, as Chairman. A like Committee was appointed by then Most Worshipful Grand master Gail N. Smith, with Right Worshipful Brother Kenneth B. Hawkins, Senior Grand Deacon, as Chairman. These Committees worked long and carefully, meeting frequently together until an agreement in principle was reached. From these meetings came the joint resolution that was passed on October 14, 1989 by our Grand Lodge. The Semi-Annual Communication of the Grand Lodge A.F. & A.M. of Connecticut, was held on the same date and an identical resolution was passed. The resolution made in the form of a motion is as follows: Whereas: The Most Worshipful Grand
Lodge, A.F. & A.M. of Whereas: Both Grand Lodges desire to
remain autonomous within Whereas: Both desire to fraternally
recognize the other, with rights IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED BY THE MOST WORSHIPFUL PRINCE HALL GRAND LODGE, F. & A.M. OF CONNECTICUT, ON THIS 14th DAY OF OCTOBER, 1989, THAT WE DWELL TOGETHER IN PEACE AND HARMONY, AND EACH DO HEREAFTER FRATERNALLY RECOGNIZE THE OTHER AS LEGITIMATE PROPONENTS OF BOTHERLY LOVE, RELIEF AND TRUTH, WITHIN THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT AND DO ACCORD TO THE OTHER, RIGHTS OF VISITATION IN GRAND LODGE AND CONSTITUENT LODGES WHERESOEVER ASSEMBLED, SUBJECT TO THE RIGHTS, POWERS AND AUTHORITY OF THE GRAND MASTERS AND THE MASTERS OF THE CONSTITUENT LODGES TO PRESIDE OVER THEIR RESPECTIVE GRAND LODGES AND LODGES. Prince Hall Freemasonry came to Connecticut in 1849 at New Haven. In 1873, four Lodges formed what is now the Most Worshipful Prince Hall Grand lodge F. & A.M. of Connecticut, Inc. Freemasonry came to A.F. & A.M. of Connecticut in 1750 at New Haven. In 1789, thirteen Lodges established the Most Worshipful Grand Lodge A.F. & A.M. of Connecticut. The year 1989, the 116th Annual Communication of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Connecticut, brought Fraternal Recognition of the Most Worshipful Grand Lodge A.F. & A.M. of Connecticut by the Most Worshipful Prince Hall Grand Lodge F. & A.M. of Connecticut, Inc. Connecticut Prince Hall Freemasons have had a dialogue with Connecticut A.F. & A.M. Masons for many years. In 7960, in the Court of Common Pleas in New Haven, Connecticut, during a suit brought by Prince Hall Grand Lodge against black lodges who claimed to be the official representation of black masonry in Connecticut. Two past Grand Masters of the A.F. & A.M. Grand Lodge, both attorneys, testified "to the recognized legitimacy of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge." This highest court of original Jurisdiction at that time found the Prince Hall Grand Lodge to be legitimate and enjoined the non-Prince Hall group. In 1966. the "Brotherhood-In-Action" 9B.I.A) program was established in the State of Connecticut uniting members of Knights of Columbus, Prince Hall Grand Lodges of Masons, B'nai B'rith and the Grand Lodge of Masons A.F. & A.M. The B.I.A. is still in existence today. Representatives of these fraternal organizations met in the Assembly room of the Capitol of the State of Connecticut in Hartford to affirm their common support to Brotherhood-In-Action. The Reaffirmation Platform of this Fraternal B.I.A. program stated in part "The constant attacks being made today on the moral standards of America call for the enlistment of the high-minded strength of fraternal organizations of this nation to combat and overcome the forces whose degenerative influences are becoming a crippling menace to the American way of life... The participating organizations look upon this effort as a crusade believing confidently that the strengths of Faith, Hope, and Charity will overcome those of hate, bigotry and evil." After more than thirty years the Brotherhood-In-Action program is still active. In 1967, decisions were made by the Masonic Charity Foundation of Connecticut to accept and admit to the care of such Foundation, at the Masonic Home and Hospital, Wallingford, Connecticut, qualified Master Masons of the Prince Hall Grand Lodghe, their wives and widows. In 1995, two Master Masons of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge were appointed to The Masonic Charity Foundation of Connecticut. In 1980, a joint table lodge was held in Hartford, Connecticut. The joint Table Lodge was given by Tuscan lodge No. 17 F. & A.M. and Level lodge No. 137 A.F. & A.M. This table Lodge was very unique in the fact that it was untyled. Intertwined with considerations of regularity and frequently confused with the issue of legitimacy is that of recognition of one Grand Jurisdiction by another. Most Grand Lodges concern themselves with the independence of the petitioning Grand Lodge and the regularity of its Masonry, i.e., that it teaches monotheism, makes the Volume of sacred Law a part of lodge furniture, practices secrecy, makes Masons of men only, confers the traditional three degrees, is nonsectarian and non-political, and has as its dominant purposes, charity, education, benevolence and religion. The following document was sent to the Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of Connecticut by Eureka Lodge No. 2, Norwich, Connecticut (Now Defunct) in 1876. It is as follows: "It is evident to all fair minded Masons, since the general movement in the several states in forming State Grand Lodges, that a well grounded belief has been established that state jurisdiction is the only legitimate government for Masonic Grand Lodges, hence the rapid decay of the National Compact. Much is needed to be done whereby a decided and successful step may be taken, that we as colored Masons of the United States may stand in full fellowship with the Masonic world. Enough has been in the way of petitions and otherwise from us to the several State Grand lodges, (white,) towards a recognition, until it has become humiliating and painful; that the every true Mason is, or should be, bound to respect the principles of Masonry, which teach us no creed and no nationality, but one universal Brotherhood, which with them is lost, first, in Masonic principle and their obligations, second, in their nation's declaration of sentiments, thirdly, to the Grand Architect of the Universe, as God made all men free, so must they be to whatever position they may attain. Under these circumstances, it becomes us to endeavor to take such steps as will bring about a firm basis of equality, and to this end we would propose, as soon as convenient and possible, also, a check - word to guard against imposture. This done, let there be a committee on correspondence from each state, or otherwise as may be deemed best, with full power to make and establish a full recognition with all the Grand Masonic Bodies throughout the world, and requiring those going abroad, who wish to visit Masonicly or otherwise, to secure a certificate signed and sealed in a manner which may be determined upon by the Grand Assembly, and do, or counsel to be done, any other business beneficial to the Craft. This Brethren, will do away with the too long continued practice of begging for recognition from prejudiced white brethren, and place us in an enviable equality with them in spite of their efforts to crush us out. We would most respectfully submit this paper to your consideration, hoping active measures will be taken upon it to insure its success."
Also taken from the proceedings of 1876, are comments on recognition by Bro. James H. Ralston, Grand Master of the Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of Connecticut, (P.H.). "I feel that I must say something in regard to one of the most absorbing topics of the day, and that is the question of recognizing the rights of colored Masons by our white brethren, or in other words, by their Grand Lodges. The proposal of the committee, appointed to investigate the matter by the Grand lodge of Ohio (white), does not quite accord with my view of recognition. They recommend that if the Grand Lodge of Ohio (colored) would take the name "African" as a prefix, they would be recognized. Now I don't see, according to the American view of jurisdiction of Grand Lodges, how they can reconcile that, and their pet theory, that no two Grand Bodies can legally exist in one and the same state. So how will they dispose of that objection? That portion of the address of the M.W. Grand Master of Minnesota, Chas. Griswold all honor to him, relating to colored Masonry, is, in my opinion, the only recognition we could honorably accept or desire, but the action of the Grand Lodge of Ohio has had the salutary effect of agitating the question and bringing to the surface the different ideas and views of other Grand Bodies on the subject. Before leaving this subject, I would say, my dear Brethren, let us so conduct ourselves in our daily walks through life, and in our intercourse with the world, that instead of being obliged to seek for the, by some, most coveted boon of recognition, that we will be felt as a strong power and be importuned by our white brethren to join them in their work and become as one Brotherhood and members of one family." Recognition
has taken many strange turns as many states deal with the process
of recognition. One such case in point is Pennsylvania. The R.W.
Grand Master of Pennsylvania stated in an article; "Pennsylvania Masons have in the past, and currently do, recognize properly constituted and warranted Grand Lodges in Japan, Africa, South America and on every continent throughout the world. I am quite sure that we will continue to recognize new lodges as they develop worldwide." "The officers of Prince Hall Freemasons in Pennsylvania, have met with our Landmarks Committee, and have asked our Grand Lodge to support their efforts with Grand lodge of England to secure a proper warrant that could, and should, be recognized throughout the entire world as a properly warranted Lodge. We have granted this request by sending a letter to the Grand Lodge of England stating that the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania has no objection to the Prince Hall of Pennsylvania receiving a warrant from England, just as we have never objected to any other worthy country receiving a warrant from the Mother Grand Lodge." The doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction is often misunderstood. First, only in the United States is it mentioned as a rule. Other Grand Lodges take it for granted that they will recognize more than one, sometimes many Grand Lodges in a territory. Even in the United states Grand lodges today and in the past recognized more than one Grand Lodge having jurisdiction in a geographic area, such as in Alaska, where the Grand Lodges of Alaska and Washington both have lodges, and in the twenty-five states (as of July 1997) where Grand Lodges recognize Prince Hall Grand Lodges that have their own lodges in the same states. Stewart W. Miner, Past Grand Master of Virginia the then Grand Secretary of the Grand Lodge of the District of Columbia and the Secretary of the Conference of Grand Secretaries of North America, made the following observations about the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction: "(a) that the Doctrine, as originally conceived, no longer exist; (b) that the historic application of the Doctrine, especially in the 19th Century, has been selective; (c) consistent applications of the Doctrine have encouraged challenge, and (d) that when it has seemed prudent, American Grand lodges have modified their interpretations of the Doctrine to satisfy challenges at hand. This process, I believe, is irreversible, and despite the attempts of a few Grand lodges to stem the tide by punitive action, their efforts will fail, in the long run, and change will questionably prevail." What does this Doctrine say? The most influential American group dealing with this subject, the Commission on Information for Recognition of the Conference of Grand Masters of Masons in North America. The Commission has existed since 1952, making recommendations on standards for recognition as well as specific suggestions about whether Grand Lodges in North America should or should not recognize each foreign Grand Lodge. The Commission's definition of the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction is different from what most Masons think it is. There can be no question about Exclusive Jurisdiction. It is basic principle that a Grand Lodge must be autonomous and have sole and undisputed authority over its constituent Lodges. This cannot be shared with any other Masonic council or power. But the question of exclusive territorial jurisdiction is not so clear-cut. In some European and Latin American countries, a Geographical or politically self-contained unit may be served by two or more Grand Lodges. If these Grand Lodges, and hence their constituent lodges, are working in amity, state or political subdivision should not bar them from recognition. In other words, exclusive territorial jurisdiction means that all the lodges under a Grand Lodge give their loyalty only to that Grand Lodge. There can be several Grand Lodges in a single country, all with many lodges, each giving loyalty to only one of the Grand Lodges, and the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction is not violated, according to the Commission. The Commission did add, "If these Grand Lodges and hence their constituent Lodges are working in amity." As you know or may not know there is still a movement to diminish the role of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Connecticut in being the prime mover in the area of recognition between the "Mainstream" masonry and Prince Hall masonry. There are elements, both "mainstream" and Prince Hall, that are attempting to give the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Massachusetts the credit for the advance of recognition because the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Massachusetts was the first Prince Hall Grand Lodge the Grand Lodge of England extended recognition to. If the truth is to be known the Grand Lodge of England and "Mainstream" Grand Lodge of Massachusetts called a meeting in Boston in 1990 with the five "Mainstream" grand Lodges that had extended recognition to their Prince Hall counterparts. The Grand Secretary of the United Grand Lodge of England and a member of General Purposes attended this meeting. The purpose of this meeting was an attempt to convince the "Mainstream" Grand Lodges to reconsider their actions and rescind recognition from their Prince Hall counterpart "so that peace and harmony may prevail in the (mainstream) Masonic family." The representatives of the five Grand Lodges informed the Grand Secretary of the United Grand Lodge of England it is not 1898 when the Grand Lodge of Washington granted recognition to the Prince Hall Grand lodge of Washington and it was rescinded nor is it 1947 when Massachusetts recognized prince Hall and it too was rescinded. It is strange that the United Grand Lodge of England recognized the Prince Hall Grand lodge of Massachusetts before the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts did, while other Prince Hall Grand Lodges were not recognized until the mainstream Grand Lodge recognized their Prince Hall counterparts. The United Grand Lodge of England recognized the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Massachusetts in 1994, The Grand Lodge of Massachusetts did not extend recognition until 1995. The Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Connecticut requested recognition by the United Grand Lodge of England, the Grand Lodge of Ireland, and the Grand Lodge of Scotland in 1994. Of course the requests were denied at that time. After the United Grand Lodge of England recognized the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Massachusetts, we were informed that we must establish our lineage to African Lodge #459. When we satisfied our lineage to African Lodge #459, we were then informed by Grand Lodge of England and the Grand Lodge of Ireland that they were going to recognize the Prince Hall Grand Lodges according to seniority after the Prince Hall Grand Lodges were recognized by the "Mainstream" Grand Lodge in each state. This meant that they would not recognize the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of New York.
|
|
