What Makes a Freemason Regular?

For many years I have struggled with the concept of regular freemasonry versus irregular freemasonry. I have asked myself the following questions: Why is it that of an estimated 6 million Freemasons worldwide, more than half are considered irregular? What makes a brother irregular, on what basis and who decides whether or not they are regular? Where do I stand as a mason and freethinker who believes in the freedom of conscience in this matter?

Freemasonry can be classified into three groups.

Regular Freemasonry
Masonic organizations that conform to the so-called ancient landmarks of Freemasonry and are recognized by the majority of mainstream Grand Lodges and Orients around the world. However, it is an unwritten rule that the UGLE determines whether or not a Grand Lodge or Orient is regular.
Members of a regular Grand Lodge of Orient are allowed to visit all regular Masonic lodges worldwide.

Not recognized
Grand Lodges that conform to the ancient landmarks, but are not recognized by the majority of regular Grand Lodges of Orients around the world. Decisive here is whether or not the UGLE recognizes her.
The UGLE and other regular Grand Lodges and Orients recognize only one Grand Lodge/Orient per country. Even if the different Grand Lodges follow the same principles and rituals.
Members of this are not allowed to visit a regular lodge anywhere.

Irregular
Organizations that have omitted one or more points of the ancient landmarks from their practices and are therefore considered incompatible with the traditional principles of mainstream Freemasonry.
Members of this are not allowed to visit a regular lodge anywhere. †

In most countries, it is a rule that a brother who visits an irregular or unrecognized lodge, his membership can be stopped for a time, and even for life be disbarred.

Ancient Landmarks
According to the UGLE, the ancient landmarks refer to Proverbs 22:28:
“Do not remove the old landmark that your fathers placed,” referring to stone pillars placed to mark land borders.

In my research, I have not found a clear definition of what exactly the old landmarks mean. In 1723, Anderson’s Constitutions stated that “Each Annual Grand Lodge has inherent power and authority to make or amend new ordinances for the benefit of this old brotherhood; always provided the old landmarks are carefully preserved.” However, Anderson’s book did not list the ancient landmarks.

The definition of the ancient landmarks specified by American jurist and Masonic writer Roscoe Pound in 1911 is what most if not all mainstream Grand Lodges and Orients agree on today:

1. Believe in a Supreme Being
2. Believe in the immortality of the soul
3. That a “book of holy law” is an indispensable part of the
   “furniture” of the lodge
4. The Legend of the Third Degree
5. Secrecy
6. The symbolism of operative masonry
7. That a Freemason must be a man, free-born and of legal
   age

The history of Freemasonry gives a little insight into how some of the ancient landmarks came to be.

While there is historical evidence to show that speculative Masonic lodges existed in England, Scotland and Europe as early as the 16th century, it was the English who formed the first Grand Lodge on June 24, 1717 (the Day of John the Baptist), when four lodges gathered at the Goose and Gridiron alehouse in St Paul’s Churchyard, London and formed themselves as a Grand Lodge.

One Anthony Sayer was elected Grand Master and called himself the Grand Lodge of London and Westminster. Little is known about Sayer, except that he was described as a gentleman (a man of independent means) when he became Grand Master, but later fell through hard times and received money from the Grand Lodge charitable fund.

In 1718, Sayer was succeeded by George Payne, a successful civil servant. The society then passed into the care of John Theophilus Desaguliers, a scientist and clergyman, and then returned to Payne. In 1721, the Grand Lodge succeeded in securing a nobleman, the Duke of Montagu, to preside as Grand Master, establishing the English Grand Lodge as an authoritative regulatory body.

As previously referred to, in 1723 James Anderson, on the authority of the Grand Lodge, published the Constitutions of Freemasonry for the purpose of regulating the craft and establishing the authority of the Grand Lodge. In addition to a fanciful history of Freemasonry, the book contains insight into the landmark with regard to religion and belief.

Anderson wrote: A Freemason is obligated to obey the moral law; and if he understands the art well, he will never be a stupid atheist or a non-religious libertine.

As Freemasonry in England became more and more autocratic and aristocratic in the 18th century, many members of the middle class left the Grand Lodge and joined Oddfellows.

After the first Grand Lodge of England was established, many lodges refused to join the new Grand Lodge. These unaffiliated Freemasons and their lodges were called “Old Masons” or “St John Masons” and “St John Lodges”. During this period, several rival Grand Lodges were formed in England.

On 17 July 1751, they formed a new rival Grand Lodge. Believing that they practised an older and therefore purer form of Freemasonry, they named their Grand Lodge “The Ancient Grand Lodge” nicknamed “The Ancients”. Those affiliated with the existing Grand Lodge were nicknamed “The Moderns”.
In 1811, The Moderns and the Ancients appointed commissioners; and over the next two years the statutes were negotiated and agreed upon, and the United Grand Lodge of England (UGLE) was finally formed.

English Freemasonry spread throughout the British Empire during the eighteenth to twentieth centuries. Together with the British Grand Lodges under whose authority they met, these lodges formed a vast network that stretched across the oceans, linking the Freemasons in the British colonies to the Grand Lodge and to each other.
It is important to put into context that between the late 18th and early 21st centuries, English Freemasonry was more or less exclusive to the aristocracy, the upper and upper-middle classes, and military officers, and was not until the 1950s and 60 of the last century became accessible to the common man.

It should also be taken into account that Great Britain then and to this day has no separation of religion and state.

Women were subordinate to men. They could not vote and were treated as third-class citizens and were therefore deemed unfit for Freemasonry.
One last note about this period; since many brothers were either slave owners or profited from the slave trade until the mid-19th century, it is not surprising that “born free” was a prerequisite for joining Freemasonry.

Early on in the existence of the UGLE, English Freemasonry was mainly ceremonial and little or no attention was paid to the philosophical aspect. This is still or even more so today. The CEO of the UGLE recently said that English Freemasonry is a charitable organization and just a nice hobby.

It is frightening to me that this organization has such a great influence on so-called regular Freemasonry and determines which constitution is or is not regular.

While English Freemasonry (also called Emulation Freemasonry) is mainly ceremonial, regular Continental Freemasonry, on the other hand, is more liberal, philosophical and even to some, spiritual and has more in common in my view with the irregular than with the so-called regular English.

As an example I quote the principles of irregular Freemasonry:

• An initiation journey that emancipates the conscience.
• A balanced balance on the initiation journey, the practice of a
  symbolic method and commitment to society as a citizen;
• The rejection of all dogmatism and all segregation;
• The refusal of all integralism and all extremisms;
• The will to work for the improvement of the human condition, for the
  advancement of individual and collective freedoms;
• The defence and promotion of absolute freedom of conscience thought,
  expression and communication;
• The defence and promotion of secularism, an essential freedom
  which permits all others;
• Research into dialogue for peace, brotherhood and development
• Working together to improve people and society.

We cannot avoid the existence of written rules and we must codify the customs that have shown their goodness. However, it sometimes happens that there are precepts emanating from a Grand Lodge or Orient that contradict the fundamental norms of Freemasonry when they limit the freedom of the Lodge as to the choice of association.

A Masonic lodge should be free and sovereign. It has a patent for the practice of a rite; but beyond that, it should not require any authorization to meet and work as it sees fit.

Unfortunately, from the 18th century onwards, the Grand Lodges and the Orients, which were initially simple emanations of the Lodges, became “powers”, in the profane sense of the word, confiscating authority and power in fields related to the spiritual, to thinking, behaviour and education itself.
In AASR, when opening the lodge, the honourable master asks the first overseer “are you a Freemason”, to which the first overseer replies, “my brethren recognize me as such”.

In my opinion “make yourself known in the West as a Freemason” is by word and demeanour. As such, I know and recognize all my brothers and sisters, regular or not.
I myself am not interested in being part of a mixed lodge, but I do insist on my right and freedom to determine for myself who I recognize as my brother. Excluding more than 50% of 6 million brothers goes against my sense of freedom of conscience, tolerance and brotherhood.

Perhaps we should consider our existence in 2022 compared to that of 300 years ago or even 100 years ago.

Grand lodges and orients were formed at a time when most institutions were structured like pyramids. A lot has changed in management where we now have level playing fields and flat corporate structures. This fits well with our work since equality and brotherhood are principles for us. Seeing the master mason as the highest masonic rank puts us all in perspective. Everything else in my opinion is dressed up like Christmas trees rather than being a service. A service to the lodges.

To this end, we might consider the establishment of masonic colleges for learning, research and revision of the ancient landmarks as a future alternative.
Read Beaudare´s comments on this subject: https://onthesquare.net/discussion-topics/the-changing-landmarks-of-freemasonry/#comment-148

Back to the question of what makes a Freemason regular, the answer is the UGLE’s recognition of the Grand Lodge under which he works.

What Makes a Freemason Legitimate?

I believe the answer to this question is “his or her heart”.