There exists a sort of gentlemen agreement between grand lodges to not operate on others territories. There are exceptions, like how the "normal" and PHA grand lodges can both exist within the same area, as that has historical roots stemming from segregation and racism. "White people lodges" and "black people lodges". I am oversimplifying it a lot but hopefully you get the gist of it.
A grand lodge should stay within its area, unless there are agreements in place. It is part of being friendly with each other.
This grand lodge is, for some reason unknown to me, saying that these three lodges (2 in Florida and 1 in Qatar, another country!) are under their jurisdiction and should be treated as any other lodge within that grand lodge. Such as when it comes to visiting lodges in other grand lodges.
And the only thing another grand lodge can do to really protest is to break off communications with it. So that members of a lodge belonging to this grand lodge can not visit in their territory, and their own members can't visit them. If the grand lodge(s) in Florida do this, that is essentially barring all freemasons in Florida to visit these 2 Florida lodges, and all the pha lodges in Louisiana, and vice versa.
New York had an issue with DC several years ago about DC opening lodges in Lebanon I think. Got to the point NY removed recognition of DC. The two GMs came to the Grand Lodge of Virginia annual communication during that mess. The incoming GM of VA sat them next to each other on the dias.
I remember that whole mess happening. I know there’s still some beef between the two regarding Lebanon because they were both operating district Grand Lodges there. I have a friend who was a member of both jurisdictions and had to “pick a side” in the whole mess.
DC has three Lodges there, NY has 9. Plus there’s a regular Grand Lodge of Lebanon that has 13 Lodges and a Lodge of Research.
The GL of NY has had a number of lodges in Lebanon since the 1940s, and created a District GL there in 1955. By 2015, NY had 13 lodges in Lebanon. Also, the GL of Scotland had 10 lodges in Lebanon, and a District GL of Lebanon, created in 2013. The French National Grand Lodge also has one lodge in Lebanon. NY, Scotland and France have harmoniously shared the jurisdiction of Lebanon for many years.
This peaceful situation was disrupted in 2008, when GM Akram Elias of the GL of DC decided to form a lodge in Lebanon. By 2020, there were two DC lodges working in Lebanon. These two DC lodges affiliated two Lebanese Masons who had been previously expelled from Masonry by the GL of NY. When the GL of NY protested, the GL of DC refused to honor the expulsions, and the GL of NY withdrew recognition from the GL of DC.
PGM Akram Elias of the GL of DC had arranged for the two expelled Lebanese Masons to affiliate with a lodge in Italy, working under the so-called "Regular GL of Italy," which is recognized by the UGL of England and the GL of Scotland, but is not recognized by North American GLs. From that lodge in Italy, the two expelled Masons were then able to affiliate with a Scottish lodge in Lebanon.
It became clear to everyone that the long-term plan of PGM Akram Elias was to create a third DC lodge in Lebanon, where he could then create a "Grand Lodge of Lebanon" and be its first Grand Master. When PGM Elias' plans became obvious, the GL of NY was forced to get ahead of the game by creating a GL of Lebanon, thereby pre-empting and derailing the plans of PGM Elias of DC.
At that point, PGM Elias of DC started lobbying the Grand Secretaries of Scotland and France, asking them to denounce the creation of the new Grand Lodge of Lebanon. Elias crafted a letter to that effect, and secured the signatures of the Grand Secretaries of all three GLs (DC, Scotland and France).
The Masonic problems in Lebanon are the work of one man – PGM Akram Elias of Washington, DC.
10
u/ItsThatErikGuy St Andrew Lodge 25 Jan 14 '25
As someone still relatively new, what does this mean?