Category Archives: FAQ

When the Grand Orient of Belgium and later that of France skipped their references to the Grand Architect of the Universe and the Bible, some (many) Freemasons felt freed. There already was some enmity with the Church, for example because of the anti-Masonic Papal Bulls, but some lodges really started to move into an anticlerical direction. Some even say (half mockingly) that in Belgium you are either a church-goer or a Freemason and a Freemason is a freethinker, which is a very specific term in Belgium.

Of course there are also many (Grand) Lodges that have also skipped the (obligatory) references to ‘religious’ elements in Freemasonry, but leave it up to their members how they view religion. It is a mostly a next step in the ‘no discussions on religion in lodge’ policy that is also used in “regular” lodges.

Then there are those who are perhaps “irregular” in the eyes of some Grand Lodges for different reasons. Social/political activities or membership of women. There is no reason to assume that all such lodges are anticlerical.

In general it is better to look at the surroundings of a (Grand) Lodge. Since the French Revolution, France in general is more opposed to the influence of the Church and thus, so is Freemasonry within that country. This is much less the case in the UK and this you can see within their Freemasonry.

In Southern America, many lodges plea for secularity (the “laïcité” of France), but that can’t to be equated with anticlericalism.

Let’s just say that there is a ‘scale’, but mostly: a lot of variety.

As in many cases, there are no easy answers. When you take mixed gender Freemasonry, it only really started to grow rapidly when there was backup from the Theosophical Society. Hundreds and hundreds of lodges were founded with a very Theosophical background. That diminished over the years, but within co-Masonry there is still a relatively high percentage of esoteric and/or spiritual members.

The other way around, “Continental” Freemasonry ‘started’ when Grand Lodges started to remove references to the GAOTU and the Bible. Did they throw the spiritual baby out with the symbolic bathwater? In some cases certainly, but you also see that the gap is filled with an interest in subjects such as Alchemy, Rosicrucianity and other esoteric subjects in some members and lodges.

Nothing can be said in general. With over a hundred Grand Lodges and many times more lodges with an enormous variety, there will be lodges that are indeed more esoteric and/or spiritual and lodges which are not.

That’s not an easy question to answer, as the answer would be along the lines of: in some countries they are, in some they are not. You can’t even pin that on continents.

Just an example. In Belgium 6,5% of the Freemasons are “regular”. A bit to the North, in the Netherlands over 90% of the Freemasons are “regular”. Quite a difference. More towards the South of Europe, “Continental” Freemasonry will be relatively larger, just as in South America. On the other hand, in the UK and USA the “regular” Masons are massively in the majority.

When it comes to ‘hard numbers’, my guess is that globally “regular” Freemasonry is larger than “Continental”, but that would make an interesting investigation.

When you find yourself on a forum with many American members (such as r/freemasonry on Reddit) you will find many users using such terms as if they are synonyms.

Clandestine
In Anglo Saxon “helan” meant something hidden, or secret, a meaning preserved in “conceal;” “hell,” the hidden place, is from the same word. Helan descended’ from the Latin celare, hide; and on this was built the Latin clandestinus, secret, hidden, furtive. In English clandestine, thus derived, came to mean a bad secret, one that must be indulged in furtively. A secret may be innocent; it is merely something done without the knowledge of others, and nothing is more common; but a clandestine act is one done in such a way as to elude observation. Clandestine Masonry is a bad kind of irregular and unlawful secret society falsely claiming to be Masonic. In the Constitutions a Clandestine Mason is defined as, “One claiming to be a Free and Accepted Mason not having received the degrees in a Lodge recognized as regular by the Grand Lodge of the State of New York.”
Concealed, usually for some secret or illicit purpose. In Freemasonry, illegal, not authorized.

This says this Masonic dictionary with no separate lemmet for “irregular”.

In 1999 the United Grand Lodge made the following statement (my emphasis):

There exist in England and Wales at least two Grand Lodges solely for women. Except that these bodies admit women, they are, so far as can be ascertained, otherwise regular in their practice. There is also one which admits both men and women to membership. They are not recognised by this Grand Lodge and intervisitation may not take place.

Source

So a Grand Lodge can be unrecognised, but “regular in their practice”. That doesn’t really make the discussion easier, but it appears to mean that UGLE does not regard the two women-Grand Lodges “irregular”.

The same quote has another interesting sentence: “The Board is also aware that there exist other bodies not directly imitative of pure antient Masonry”. So there is the point of “imitative of pure antient Masonry”.

When an organisation is not “imitative” it is not Freemasonry at all and I guess terms such as “bogus” apply there. Then an organisation can be “regular in their practice” or not even that, for example, because it uses no Grand Architect of the Universe or a Bible.

It all is shaky ground and it is particularly so when you know that within “Continental Freemasonry” different types of lodges can exist within the same Grand Lodge. Lodges with or without a Bible, lodges with or without women.

It takes some investigation to learn how a certain organisations stands to another, so terms would better be used with some care. When you do get a term thrown at you that appears to be off mark, just conclude that your Grand Lodge isn’t recognised by the ‘thrower’ and leave it to that. There can still be friendly relations, ‘half recognition’ as in the case of UGLE, there can be amity, but more often, there may be no official standpoint whatsoever.

To make it even more complicated. When a (new) Grand Lodge contacts other Grand Lodges about recognition, it could be that one agrees and another doesn’t. When you want to know if you can visit lodges of some organisation, best ask you Grand Secretary. (S)he may have to do some investigation, since it is not like every Grand Lodge has a list of all existing (semi-)Masonic organisations listing if they are recognised or not.

A little closing remark about “scam” organisations. There are those who portray themselves as Freemasons, but are only in to get your money. There are also those who actually grand degrees (only on paper or even ‘for real’) for substantial amounts of money. It is hard to draw the line between good, questionable and bad. When in doubt, ask around!

Wrong!

The name an organisation itself says nothing about recognition. When a country has a Grand Lodge and for whatever reason a new organisation is founded, the new organisation can just call itself Grand Lodge with a very different name, or choose to name itself “Grand Orient”. Then again, perhaps the new organisation prefers to call itself a “confederation”. It is only later that existing Grand Lodges will decide if they recognise the new organisation.

So, the Grand Orient of France is “Continental”, but the Grand Orient of the Netherlands” is “regular”. Both the Grand Orient and the Grand Lodge of Belgium are “Continental”.

Confusing? Definitely!

“Modern” Freemasonry (after 1717) has brought different sets of “Landmarks”, rules of the game so to say. One of these rules was that a Freemason had to be a man. This wasn’t such a weird rule in these days, since women didn’t even have the right to vote yet.

Another such rule is that a candidate had to believe in ‘something higher’. In some Grand Lodges this can be the Christian God, usually it isn’t that specific. The term “Grand Architect of the Universe” is vague on purpose. Both a Catholic and a Protestant can agree on the existence of a GAOTU, so can a Muslim, Hindu, etc.

But as society became more and more rationalistic, some people started to wonder if the requirement isn’t actually limiting? Can a person with no (set) faith not be a good man who can improve himself? Some think this is possible, so first in Belgium and later in France, the ‘religious’ reference to the GAOTU was skipped and more conservative Grand Lodges withdrew recognition. That means that members of these Grand Lodges can no longer visit each others formal meetings. Taken a step further, it means that some Freemasons will tell others that they are no Freemasons at all.

Regularity is a strange thing. Some Grand Lodges recognise only one Grand Lodge per country. Other Grand Lodges have no such limitation. Therefor it is possible that Italy has two “regular” Grand Lodges according to some “regular” Grand Lodges and only one to others. Regularity is in basis nothing but the mutual recognition between to organisations and doesn’t necessarily say anything about the recognition of GL#3.

The same goes within “Continental” Freemasonry. It is not so easy that all “Continental” organisation recognises every other.

Yep, Freemasonry is a weird and varied world.

That’s a very broad question. Not every “regular” lodge works entirely the same as every other. There are different rites which can make huge differences. The same goes outside “regular” Freemasonry. There is a wide variety of rites, but there can be other differences. A lodge can admit only men, or only women, or any gender for example.

Basically Masonic rituals have a lot in common. There is something that makes Freemasonry, Freemasonry, right? Differences could be different ways of dressing or either or no use of a Bible. Every lodge has its own profile, so just try to visit a few so you can make up your mind which would fit best.

Sometimes.

An often-asked question on Masonic fora. The usual answer on boards with mostly “regular” members will be “no”. Within “Continental” Freemasonry, things are not that clear-cut.

Since 1877 the Grand Orient de France no longer requires its members to believe in anything. The same goes for other Grand Lodges. But beware, it is also possible that within the same organisation some lodges do ask that of their prospective members while other lodges don’t. The golden way is to just ask.

The answer is not the clear “no” that you will get on some places. You are looking towards Freemasonry that is regarded “irregular” by many Freemasons.

For your information, that faith is not a requirement does not automatically mean that a lodge does not use a Bible. Also here are differences. There are lodges that use a Bible, there are those who use another book, such as the regulations of the Grand Lodge or the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, there are also lodges that use no book at all. When it doubt: ask the lodge you are interested in.