Welcome to Paul M. Bessel's website about Table of Contents

Masonic Recognition Issues

GLNF Recognition
Home Up


Recognition of the GLNF by U.S. Grand Lodges in the 1940s and 1950s

(listed in chronological order)


Michigan - 1948

[the following is from the Michigan Grand Lodge Proceedings 1948, pages 140-142]

"Grand Master Hooper: . . . I want to tell you something about the marvelous time we had in England and France, and the great honors that were accorded us. I have a confession to make. Someone back here, Maryland I believe, has said that I should make this confession, and I do not hesitate to do so. We were invited by the Grand Master of the Nationale Grand Lodge of France to come over to Paris. . . . I must say that we went knowing that Michigan did not recognize this Grand Lodge. . . . even though Michigan does not recognize them, we went, and we had a grand time. They were working the Fellowcraft Degree, and we could follow it after a fashion. We could not understand French, but we did get a word here and there such as * * * . . . They had a fine candidate, and they finally finished conferring the Fellowcraft Degree upon him. Then we thought they were ready to close lodge. But they seemed to be voting on something. . . . Then the Grand Master of France turned and said, "My dear Brothers from America, you have just been made honorary members of this lodge." Well, we all looked at each other, and we hardly knew what to say, because Maryland does not recognize them either."

"Brother Strawhecker, P.G.M.: Most Worshipful Grand Master, as the Junior Past Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Michigan, I move that the Grand Master be healed.

"Grand Master Hooper: Past Grand Master Strawhecker moves that the Grand Master, and Deputy Grand Master, be healed.

"(Laughter and applause).

"Well, that is the story. I am so pleased that the Fraternal Relations Committee has brought in this report recommending the Nationale Grand Lodge of France. My personal opinion is that we want nothing to do with the other two Grand Lodges; their Masonry is not the same as ours. . . .

[after the Grand Lodge voted to recognize the GLNF]

"Grand Master Hooper: Thank you very much, Brethren, for relieving me of this burden that was on my mind for having visited that French lodge. And I want to say to you, Most Worshipful Grand Master of Maryland, that my action is now legitimate. I suggest that you go now and do likewise.

"(Laughter and applause)."


District of Columbia (Washington D.C.) - 1952 & 1953

In 1952, the Correspondence Committee of the D.C. Grand Lodge considered the subject of recognition of Masonic Grand bodies in France, which had been considered previously in 1870, 1914, and 1917. 

The committee said the GLNF had requested recognition, having already been recognized by the Grand Lodges of England, Scotland, Ireland, Canada, Australia, and 20 U.S. States. The Committee pointed out that the GLF (not the GLNF) was constituted in 1904 and recognized by our Grand Lodge in 1917. As of 1952, the GLF was recognized by 6 U.S. Grand Lodges, compared to 20 that recognized the GLNF as of then.

However, instead of saying that the GLNF’s request for recognition could not be considered because the D.C. Grand Lodge could only recognize one Grand Lodge in France, which had been the policy of the D.C. Grand Lodge in the past, this time the D.C. Grand Lodge Correspondence Committee recommended that "any change of recognition in France should be made only after proper consideration and disposition of the exiting recognition." (District of Columbia Grand Lodge Proceedings 1952, pages 52-53.)

Then, in 1953, the D.C. Grand Lodge took some interesting actions. A Special Committee to revise the Standards of Recognition reported its recommendations for changes in the standards that would henceforth be used by the District of Columbia Grand Lodge when deciding whether or not to recognize a foreign Grand Lodge. Among the changes was a significant amendment to a provision in the D.C. Grand Lodge’s policies that had previously (since 1930) stated that to be recognized, a Grand Lodge would have to have:

"... sole, undisputed and exclusive authority over the symbolic lodges within its jurisdiction ...." (District of Columbia Grand Lodge Proceedings 1930, page 19.)

In the new recognition standards, which are still in effect now, to be recognized a foreign Grand Lodge has to have:

"... sovereign jurisdiction over the Lodges under its control; ... with sole, undisputed and exclusive authority over the Craft or Symbolic Degrees ...; ... and that it does not extend its authority into, or establish lodges in, a territory occupied by a lawful Grand Lodge, without the expressed consent of said Grand Lodge ...." (District of Columbia Grand Lodge Proceedings 1953, page 48.)

While this might be interpreted as retaining the "Doctrine of Exclusive Territorial Jurisdiction," the American masonic doctrine that since the late 1700s was felt by many to mean that each U.S. Grand Lodge could only recognize one Grand Lodge in any U.S. State or foreign country, it could also be interpreted differently. (For details about the Doctrine of Exclusive Territorial Jurisdiction, see Stewart W. Miner, "The American Doctrine: A Concept Under Siege," 1992 Transactions of the Virginia Research Lodge No. 1777, pp. 11–25. A copy of that paper is also at http://bessel.org/excljur.htm ) 

Interestingly, immediately after the adoption of this change in the D.C. Grand Lodge’s recognition standards, the Committee on Correspondence submitted a report on the GLF and the GLNF. It repeated that the Grand Lodge of D.C. had been in recognition with the GLF for 36 years, but quoted from letters, including one from the Grand Master of the GLF, that said some lodges in the GLF had not returned the Bible to their altars, but added that the GLF in 1953 reminded all lodges to do this. No change was suggested in the D.C. Grand Lodge’s recognition of the GLF. The Committee then recommended that the D.C. Grand Lodge also recognize the GLNF, while still recognizing the GLF, and said:

".... The approval of this recognition, while continuing the former recognition of another Grand Lodge in the same territory is not in conflict with the ‘Basic Principles for Grand Lodge Recognition’ which was just adopted. Your committee base their recommendation on the belief that the Declaration of Basic Principles adopted by and presented in behalf of the [GLNF} meets our requirements.... The Grand Lodges of Alabama, California and Rhode Island recognize both the [GLF] and the [GLNF]."

The D.C. Grand Lodge Proceedings say this "report was then considered and the recommendations approved, which resulted in the continued recognition of the [GLF] and the recognition of the [GLNF] and the exchange of representatives." (District of Columbia Grand Lodge Proceedings 1953, pages 49-50.)

Thus, the D.C. Grand Lodge had knowingly recognized 2 Masonic grand bodies simultaneously in France, knowing that they did not recognize each other or support having any other Grand Lodge recognize both of them. Therefore, it can be said that the D.C. Grand Lodge has not adhered to the Doctrine of Exclusive Territorial Jurisdiction since 1953, at least in the case of France, and that the D.C. Grand Lodge could recognize two or more Grand Lodges in simultaneously in France or elsewhere any time that Grand Lodge's voting delegates wish to do so.


Nebraska - 1954

Nebraska Grand Lodge Proceedings 1954, page 240

"The French National Grand Lodge is one of three existing in France, the other two being the Grand Lodge of France and the Grand Orient. Years ago, as a result of their concept of freedom of worship and thought, the latter two either removed the Bible from their altars or substituted a book of blank paper. The Grand Lodge of France has practically restored the Bible to its lodges and the time may soon come when it, too, will be eligible for recognition. The National Grand Lodge is very like our own in essentials, it is growing, five new lodges were consecrated this year. These three Grand Lodges work in the same territory, but as exclusive jurisdiction is of little consequence except in the United States, this is something we must get used to over here in this business of universal recognition. The color line may pass too, some day as it has in Asia and Africa. The National Grand Lodge of France fulfills all the requirements of our Grand Lodge and we therefore make our recommendation as above."


Utah - 1955

Utah Grand Lodge Proceedings 1955, page 56

"Grande Loge Nationale Francaise: (National Grand Lodge of France)

"We take pleasure in recommending that this Grand Lodge extend recognition to a second French Grand Lodge, without any impairment of our relations with the Grand Lodge of France, with which we have enjoyed amicable relations for some 37 years.

"Our file on this matter exceeds forty pages of correspondence. We first received a request for recognition of this Grand Lodge in 1950.

"At the last Annual Communication we had the pleasure of reporting that the Grand Lodge of France had directed its subordinate Lodges to restore the V.S.L. to their Altars.

"Both of the Grand Lodges have advised your Committee that there is no claims [sic] to exclusive jurisdiction over French Masonry on the part of either, nor objection by either to recognition of both, and we note that six of the Grand Lodges of the United States are now in amity with both. The Grande Loge Nationale has been in existence for 42 years,  has more than 2,000 members and 50 Lodges and is recognized by 40 American Grand Lodges." 


Missouri - 1957
(very unusual, because the GLF was recognized by the GL of Missouri in 1957, in addition to the GLNF, which was already recognized by the GL of Missouri)

[the following is from the Missouri Grand Lodge Proceedings 1957, pages 67-69]

"Report of the Committee on Recognition of Foreign Grand Lodges

"M. Wor. Brother Ray V. Denslow presented the report of the Committee on Recognition of Foreign Grand Lodges which was adopted and is as follows:

"We have previously extended recognition to the [GLNF], composed of a large element of English, and some few Americans. It is distinctly regular in every way, yet it exists in a country where there are three other grand lodges, composed of French people, and its membership is so small as to be almost negligible.

"The Grand Lodge of France, in its desire to become regular, has changed its law so that the Bible is now a required piece of furniture; there may be instances where this is not being done, but we are assured by the Grand Master, Richard Dupuy, known to members of your committee, that charters will be arrested in the event the law of the grand lodge is not carried out. Many of our American grand lodges recognize both the Grand Lodge of France and the Grand Lodge Nationale; a similar situation exists in Mexico and other countries. For a time it was thought that the two grand lodges would unite; it was not done, but we do not believe it was through any fault of the Grand Lodge. That the Grand Lodge has high standing is apparent in that their representatives met with representatives of Grand Lodge Nationale, who expressed a willingness to consolidate. The plan was not carried out, due to the failure of the Grand Lodge of France to accept certain conditions which would have required the united grand lodge to select its grand master for a term of years from the smaller of the two grand lodges -- the Grand Lodge Nationale.

"We believe the Grand Lodge of France deserves recognition and we so recommend."


Copyright © 1998-2008 by Paul M. Bessel - all rights reserved

If you have any suggestions, comments, or questions about this website, please feel free to send an email message to me by clicking on the following:  paul@bessel.org 

To see an index of other webpages with similar information, such as webpages with charts comparing Grand Lodge policies, please feel free to click on the following:  http://bessel.org/webindex.htm