MasonicWiki:Regularity
 | Comments, discussions, and proposed changes to this policy should be directed to MasonicWiki:Requests for comment. |
The Masonic Wiki's policy on recognition and regularity governs how The Masonic Wiki documents Masonic Lodges, Grand Lodges, obediences, rites, appendant bodies, concordant bodies, and other organizations whose recognition or regularity may differ among jurisdictions. In short:
It is not a Grand Lodge, governing Masonic authority, recognition commission, or arbiter of Masonic regularity.
Purpose
Questions of Masonic recognition and regularity are important and frequently complex. A Grand Lodge or other Masonic body may be recognized by one jurisdiction while remaining unrecognized, irregular, or prohibited by another. Recognition may also change over time as Grand Lodges issue new edicts, withdraw recognition, restore relations, or revise their standards.
The purpose of this policy is to ensure that such organizations and disputes are documented accurately, neutrally, respectfully, and with appropriate attribution,
Scope of the Wiki
Much of The Masonic Wiki's content will naturally be most relevant to Freemasons within the broad sphere of recognition associated with the United Grand Lodge of England and the Grand Lodges with which it maintains relations.
This reflects the availability of sources, the backgrounds of contributors, and the traditions most commonly documented in English-language Masonic literature. It should not be interpreted as a declaration that only UGLE-recognized organizations may be discussed on the Wiki.
The Masonic Wiki may contain properly sourced articles about:
- Grand Lodges recognized by UGLE;
- Grand Lodges recognized by other Masonic jurisdictions;
- Prince Hall Grand Lodges;
- organizations not recognized by the UGLE;
- liberal, adogmatic, mixed-gender, and women's Masonic obediences;
- historical Masonic organizations;
- defunct, disputed, irregular, or unrecognized bodies;
- organizations and subject-matter opposing Freemasonry as a whole;
- organizations claiming a connection to Freemasonry; and
- controversies concerning recognition, lineage, regularity, or legitimacy.
The Wiki does not imply legitimacy
The inclusion of an organization in The Masonic Wiki does not constitute recognition, endorsement, approval, or confirmation of regularity. The appearance of a Lodge, Grand Lodge, or Masonic body on The Masonic Wiki does not imply that readers may visit it masonically.
Similarly, hyperlinks, categories, photographs, event listings, biographies, or references to cooperative activities do not indicate recognition or permission for intervisitation.
Before visiting or communicating masonically with another organization, members should consult their own Grand Lodge or competent Masonic authority.
Regularity and recognition
Regularity and recognition are related concepts, but they are not always identical.
A Grand Lodge may consider another body regular in origin or practice without formally recognizing it. A jurisdiction may also withhold or withdraw recognition for administrative, territorial, political, disciplinary, or diplomatic reasons that do not directly concern ritual regularity.
Because different Masonic systems define these terms differently, articles should explain how the relevant organizations use them.
Where possible, statements regarding regularity or recognition should identify:
- the jurisdiction or organization making the determination;
- the date of the determination;
- the official document, edict, proceedings, or statement containing it;
- whether the decision concerns recognition, regularity, visitation, intercommunication, territorial jurisdiction, or another issue; and
- whether the determination remains current.
The Wiki is not an authority on recognition
The Masonic Wiki makes no attempt to act as an authority on fraternal recognition. Recognition is a matter determined by individual sovereign Grand Lodges, obediences, governing bodies, and other competent Masonic authorities according to their own constitutions, laws, customs, treaties, and edicts.
The Masonic Wiki cannot determine whether a Mason may lawfully visit a particular Lodge, communicate Masonically with its members, attend a joint event, participate in its degrees, or otherwise engage in Masonic relations.
Readers and contributors must consult the laws, edicts, official communications, and recognized authorities of their own jurisdiction when determining whether a particular Lodge, Grand Lodge, obedience, or Masonic body is considered recognized and/or regular.
Nothing published on The Masonic Wiki should be relied upon as permission to engage in Masonic visitation or communication.
Referencing recognition and/or regularity
Recognition is not universal. Statements such as “this Grand Lodge is recognized,” “this body is regular,” or “this Lodge is clandestine” are usually incomplete unless they identify the authority making that determination.
Contributors should use attributed and jurisdiction-specific language. For example:
- "The United Grand Lodge of England does not recognize the Grand Lodge of Example."
- "The Grand Lodge of Example is recognized by the Grand Orient of Sample and is a member of Organization X."
- "The Grand Lodge of Sample prohibits its members from holding Masonic communication with members of the Grand Lodge of Example."
Contributors should generally avoid unsupported universal statements such as:
- "The Grand Lodge of Example is/is not legitimate"
- "The Grand Lodge of Example is/is not universally recognized."
- "The members of that organization are/are not real Freemasons."
Where recognition differs among jurisdictions, the article should explain the disagreement rather than selecting one position as the Wiki's official view. It is important to retain a Neutral Point of View.
Changes in recognition
Recognition relationships may change. Articles should use dates and historical context rather than presenting recognition as permanently fixed. For example:
- "The Grand Lodge of Example recognized the Grand Lodge of Sample in 1992, suspended relations in 2004, and restored recognition in 2018."
Where an older source is used, editors should verify that it still represents the current position before describing it as current. Historical recognition lists remain useful when documenting the situation during a particular period, but they should be clearly dated.
Describing affiliations
Membership in an international association, federation, conference, or treaty organization may be relevant to an article, but it should not be presented as universal recognition.
For example, membership in CLIPSAS, the Conference of Grand Masters of Masons in North America, or another international organization demonstrates a particular relationship or affiliation. It does not necessarily establish recognition by every member organization, by UGLE, or by Grand Lodges outside that association.
Articles should identify the specific nature of the relationship.
Neutral and academic treatment
The Masonic Wiki approaches disputes concerning recognition, regularity, lineage, and legitimacy from an academic and neutral perspective.
Articles should describe:
- what an organization calls itself;
- its documented history and development;
- its structure, practices, and affiliations;
- the recognition it claims or receives;
- objections or contrary determinations made by other bodies;
- relevant historical and jurisdictional context; and
- changes in recognition over time.
The Wiki should not decide which competing Masonic tradition is spiritually, philosophically, or fraternally valid or superior.
Neutral treatment does not require treating every claim as equally credible. Claims should be evaluated according to the quality of available evidence. Reliable historical records, official proceedings, constitutions, scholarly works, and clearly identified primary sources should receive greater weight than anonymous allegations, promotional claims, social-media posts, or unsupported personal statements.
Use of the term “clandestine”
The term clandestine has been used within Freemasonry in several different ways. In some jurisdictions it refers to a Lodge or Grand Lodge formed without lawful authority. In others it is used more broadly for organizations considered irregular, unrecognized, fraudulent, or prohibited.
The term may also be regarded as inflammatory or imprecise when used without attribution.
The Masonic Wiki may document the term, its history, and its use by particular jurisdictions. However, contributors should not use clandestine as an unattributed label in the Wiki's editorial voice when a more precise description is available.
Preferred wording includes:
- "The Grand Lodge of Example classifies this organization as clandestine."
- "The organization is not recognized by the Grand Lodges listed below."
- "Its claim to Masonic lineage has been disputed by..."
Where the word appears in the title of an official document or in a properly attributed quotation, it may be reproduced accurately.
Article titles and terminology
Organizations should normally be identified by the official or most commonly used English form of their name.
An article title should not ordinarily include labels such as irregular, clandestine, or unrecognized unless:
- the term forms part of an established historical name;
- it is necessary to distinguish the organization from another body with the same name; or
- there is a strong editorial reason supported by reliable sources.
Recognition information should generally be addressed within the article rather than embedded in its title.
Organizations should not be placed in categories that declare them universally regular or irregular unless the category itself is clearly defined according to a particular authority or jurisdiction.
Reliable sourcing
Claims about recognition or regularity should be supported by reliable sources whenever reasonably possible.
Appropriate sources may include:
- official Grand Lodge proceedings;
- constitutions, regulations, edicts, and circulars;
- official lists of recognized jurisdictions;
- formal statements issued by Masonic governing bodies;
- reports from recognized commissions on information or recognition;
- reputable Masonic research publications;
- academic books and journal articles;
- archived historical records; and
- official websites of the organizations being discussed.
An organization's own publications may be used to describe its history, structure, membership, beliefs, affiliations, or claimed recognition. Such material should be attributed where the claim may be disputed.
For example: "According to its official website, the organization was founded in 1985 and maintains relations with twelve other obediences."
Self-published claims should not automatically be presented as independently verified facts.
Contributor responsibilities
Contributors writing about recognition disputes should:
- disclose relevant conflicts of interest when appropriate;
- distinguish personal experience from verifiable fact;
- avoid using articles to promote their own Grand Lodge or obedience;
- avoid using the Wiki to prosecute jurisdictional disputes;
- represent opposing positions accurately;
- provide citations for disputed claims;
- use precise and attributed language; and
- comply with the laws and obligations of their own Masonic jurisdiction.
Contributors are responsible for determining whether their participation or disclosures are permitted under the obligations, regulations, and customs of their own jurisdiction. The Masonic Wiki cannot interpret a contributor's Masonic obligations or provide authorization to disclose information.
Administrative discretion
The Masonic Wiki's administrators may intervene when content concerning recognition or regularity becomes promotional, inflammatory, repetitive, poorly sourced, legally problematic, or inconsistent with the goals of the project.
Administrative action may include:
- requesting additional citations;
- replacing universal claims with attributed language;
- removing unsupported or defamatory statements;
- restricting editing on disputed pages;
- moving arguments to an appropriate discussion page;
- temporarily protecting an article;
- warning or blocking disruptive contributors; and
- referring difficult questions to the wider editorial community.
Administrative actions taken under this policy do not constitute a Masonic ruling upon the organization or individual involved.
For example, removing an unsupported claim that a body is regular does not mean the administrators have declared it irregular. Removing an insulting description of an unrecognized body does not mean the administrators have recognized it.
Administrative decisions concern the quality, neutrality, safety, and civility of the Wiki's content.
Disputes between sources
When reliable sources disagree, articles should describe the disagreement.
Editors should not conceal a significant dispute merely because one position is more familiar to the Wiki's contributors. At the same time, minor or poorly supported claims should not be given disproportionate prominence.
The amount of coverage given to each position should reflect:
- the quality of the sources;
- the historical importance of the dispute;
- the relevance of the dispute to the article;
- the number and significance of jurisdictions involved; and
- the degree to which the disagreement affects the organization being described.
Discussion pages should be used to resolve disagreements about wording, sources, and weight. They should not be used to issue Masonic judgments or demand that other contributors recognize a particular body.
Non-Masonic and fraudulent organizations
Neutrality does not require the Wiki to accept every organization claiming to be Masonic as a genuine Masonic body.
The Wiki may document organizations accused of fraudulently using Masonic names, symbols, credentials, or lineage. Such claims require especially careful sourcing.
Articles should distinguish between:
- a legitimate but unrecognized Masonic obedience;
- a disputed claimant to Masonic lineage;
- a non-Masonic fraternal organization influenced by Freemasonry;
- a commercial organization using Masonic imagery; and
- an organization credibly identified as fraudulent.
Editors should avoid assuming that unrecognized automatically means fraudulent.
Policy development
This policy is expected to grow and change as The Masonic Wiki becomes more active.
New contributors, a wider range of Masonic traditions, and more complex disputes will likely reveal questions not fully addressed by the present version. The policy may therefore be expanded, clarified, or reorganized through community discussion and administrative experience.
Changes should preserve the policy's central principles:
- The Masonic Wiki is not an authority on recognition.
- Recognition is determined by individual Masonic jurisdictions.
- Inclusion does not imply endorsement or recognition.
- Disputed subjects should be treated neutrally and academically.
- Contributors must consult the rules of their own jurisdictions.
- Reliable sourcing and precise attribution are required.
- Masonic civility must be maintained.
