Recent Events in Philippine Masonry

No Host Fellowship 3

2010-01-10T21:52:00.010+08:00

Greetings brethren!

On December 3, 2009, the No Host Fellowship 3 was held at the Airport Juan Restaurant , Airport Road, Pasay City and was attended by Filipino Masons from different Grand Jurisdiction/Obedience. Those who attended brought gifts for the orphans as agreed in the last No Host Fellowship. The brethren once again experienced mutual respect, harmony and brotherly love.

As a continuation of the No Host Fellowship 3, the brethren once again gathered on December 13, 2009 at the multi purpose hall of Justineville Subdivision, Imus, Cavite to share the spirit of Christmas to the 56 orphans of Ma-Ma’s Hope Haven Orphanage who were transported from Gen. Trias, Cavite . The orphans were treated with a simple meal (spaghetti, fried chicken, hamburger sandwich and juice) and were given each a gift bag (toys, clothes, rubber slippers, bath towels, bath soap, tooth brush, tooth paste, cotton buds, powdered bear brand milk, milo and assorted candies and for the very young ones disposal diapers). Games were held and winners were given additional gifts and cash. It was a touching experience seeing these orphans happy, loved and cared for and listening to them saying non stop thank you. Please see attached pictures.

The brethren agreed to meet for the next No Host Fellowship in March 2010.

Masons can really make the difference because we care.

Thank you for your time and support and wishing you and your family a Very Merry Christmas and a Peaceful and Prosperous New Year.

With my warmest fraternal embrace.

Bro. Ben Apacible
Kalilayan Lodge No. 37, Lucena City
Araw Lodge No. 18, Manila

NO HOST FELLOWSHIP

2009-08-16T19:50:00.013+08:00

Greetings Brethren!

I am pleased to inform you that last Thursday, August 13, 2009, a “NO HOST FELLOWSHIP” was held at Airport Juan, Airport Road , Pasay City. The first similar fellowship was held in March 2007.

The affair was attended by 51 brethren from the Grand Lodge of the Philippines , Independent Grand Lodge of the Philippine Island and the Grand Logia National de Filipinas.

It was an event which united the attendees who exchanged pleasantries, knew each other better and considered future activities of the same nature. The atmosphere was of harmony and mutual respect. It could be felt that deeply rooted in the hearts of the attendees were brotherly love, relief, truth, liberty, equality and fraternity. There was never a dull moment during the fellowship. Attendees transferred from one table to another taking this rare opportunity to meet and know others. It was a dream and a wish come true.

The suggestion of the next fellowship on the first week of December of this year was agreed upon. This time attendees will bring toys which will be distributed to an orphanage and share the spirit of Christmas with orphaned children on the second week of December.

The purpose and rules for future fellowships were likewise agreed upon to wit:

NO HOST FELLOWSHIP

PURPOSE

For Filipino Masons to meet in harmony, with mutual respect for one another and having a common denominator …. Brotherly Love, Relief, Truth, Liberty , Equality and Fraternity. It is not intended to discuss rituals, principles, internal affairs, conflicts and other concerns of the brethren’s respective jurisdiction/obedience. It is not further intended to discuss religion and politics.

RULES

1. No speeches/discussions about Freemasonry
2. No Masonic regalia, banners and the like to be worn or displayed
3. This is purely getting to know each other and fellowship

INVITATION

To the Filipino Masons regardless of jurisdiction/obedience who wish to attend.

I am likewise sharing with you pictures taken during this event.

May the GAOTU bless and guide all Masons withersoever dispersed.

(with Bro. Vic Valdez and Bro. Cesar Go)

With my warmest fraternal embrace.

Bro. Ben Apacible
Kalilayan Lodge No. 37, Lucena City
Araw Lodge No. 18, Manila

TO CONVERSE MASONICALLY or MASONIC COMMUNICATION

2009-04-11T02:29:00.009+08:00

Greetings brethren,

Last Wednesday, April 8, 2009, MW Pacifico “Boy” Aniag, GM of the MWGLP, signed GLP CIRCULAR NO. 10 - ANIAG.doc RE: Meaning of “TO CONVERSE MASONICALLY or MASONIC COMMUNICATION.”

This Circular finally defined that “to converse masonically or to hold Masonic communication has substantially the same meaning.”

The Circular further defined/clarified that “to converse masonically with any clandestine mason, or to hold Masonic communication with a clandestine mason, includes attending formal lodge meetings of a clandestine lodge or one declared to be clandestine, attending meetings or assemblies, whether formal or informal, of the members of a clandestine lodge, when the subject matter or topic thereof is on Freemasonry, and speaking with, talking to, or discussing with a clandestine mason on topics or subjects that involve Freemasonry in any of its aspects."

Furthermore, the Circular defined/clarified that “a chance meeting by a brother with a clandestine mason who happens to be a close relative or close friend of the brother and on the occasion of which pleasntries are exchanged, or other social information are discussed or social interaction is maintained without any Masonic subject or topic being talked about or discussed, is not to be considered conversing masonically or holding masonic communication.”

This clarifies GLP Circular No. 14 Series 2008 - Gonzales.doc which was issued as an offshoot of AN OPEN INVITATION TO A NO HOST FELLOWSHIP - BRETHREN ALL.doc. The “No Host Fellowship” was conceptualized in March 2008 purposely for fellowship only with the ultimate aim of fostering brotherly love, equality, fraternity and respect among Masons regardless of grand jurisdiction/obedience. The “No Host Fellowship” was similar to the fellowships among Masons, Knights of Columbus, Knights of Rizal and the fellowships among multi-faith organizations and members without the discussion or topics on individual beliefs and affiliation.

In August 2008, I wrote an article in the 100th Anniversary issue of the Sunbeam, the official magazine of Araw lodge No. 18, titled MASONIC COMMUNICATION, HARMONY and UNIVERSAL MASONRY.doc which was also posted in the Recent Events in Philippine Masonry. What inspired me to write this article was the Speech of MW Puno, PGM, on “Harmony” during the 92nd ANCOM in Bacolod last year and the theme of our GM MW Aniag…“Harmony, the Strength and Beauty of Masonry”.

With this new Circular, it is my hope and prayer that the illusive dream of true harmony and mutual respect amonst us, Masons regardless of grand jurisdiction/obedience, will soon be realized.

May the GAOTU bless and guide all Masons withersoever dispersed.

With my warmest fraternal embrace.

Bro. Ben Apacible
Kalilayan Lodge no. 37, Lucena City
Araw Lodge No. 18, Manila

MASONIC COMMUNICATION, HARMONY and UNIVERSAL MASONRY

2008-10-27T08:13:00.002+08:00

By BROTHER MEDARDO BENJAMIN APACIBLE, PM, PDDGM

I have been a Master Mason for over 28 years and still crave for more Masonic knowledge. It seems that the study of Masonry is a never ending undertaking

To this date I still search for the true and universally accepted meaning among Masons of ”MASONIC COMMUNICATION or MASONIC INTERCOURSE”.

It is said that the Grand Master possesses awesome powers and is limited only by the Ancient Landmarks, the Constitution & By-Laws, the customs, traditions, and practices. He can declare a congregation of Masons belonging to different Grand Lodges not recognized by the other, fellowship or otherwise, as violation of Masonic Communication.

Our Masonic Law Book does not clearly define what is Masonic Communication or Masonic Intercourse. However, it is also said that prudence dictates that it is up to individual’s perception whether a gathering is a Masonic Communication. Again, the Grand Master can declare whether such is a Masonic Communication.

Some also say that public installation of officers, Job's Daughter, DeMolay are part of Masonic Communications. But if it were such, the more non-masons must not be invited or allowed inside a public installation. Then why should it be called a Public Installation if it is not open to everybody, masons and non-masons alike?

And finally some say it is a violation of our obligation, constitution, etc… to have Masonic Communication or Masonic Intercourse with non-recognized or clandestine Masons.

This reminds us of the article of the late WB Theron Dunn “ON MASONIC REGULARITY” particularly in the paragraph on Masonic Communication. Said he:

“Masonic Communication, or as it is alternately called, Masonic Intercourse, involves any type of communication involving sharing the secrets of masonry. Primarily, that is sitting in a tyled lodge session, which is any type of Masonic meeting where the general public is NOT allowed, or where the qualification for attendance is being a Mason”.

1

And in support to this portion of his article is the meaning of COMMUNICATION as found in the on line Masonic Dictionary.

http://www.masonicd ictionary. com/contact. html

Communication, Masonic
The term communication with respect to Freemasonry is often misunderstood. Communication in this sense means a lodge meeting. Therefore the injunction that a Mason is not to hold Masonic Communication with a clandestine mason simply means you are prohibited from sitting in the same lodge room. (See following definitions for support)
- Source: MasonicDictionary.com
COMMUNICATION
There is some dispute as to the origin of this word but usually it is held to have come from communis, a Latin term for general, or universal, whence our common, common wealth, communion, communism, communal and many similar words. To communicate is to share something with others so that all may partake of it; a communication is an act, transaction, or deliberation shared in by all present. From this it will be seen how appropriate is our use of the word to designate those official Lodge meetings in which all members have a part or a voice.
- Source: 100 Words in Masonry
COMMUNICATION
The meeting of a Lodge is so called. There is a peculiar significance in this term. To communicate, which, in the Old English form, was to common, originally meant to share in common with others. The great sacrament of the Christian Church, which denotes a participation in the mysteries of the religion and a fellowship in the church, is called a communion, which is fundamentally the same as a communication, for he who partakes of the communion is said to communicate. Hence the meetings of Masonic Lodges are called communications, to signify that it is not simply the ordinary meeting of a society for the transaction of business, but that such meeting is the fellowship of men engaged in a common pursuit, and governed by a common principle, and that there is therein a communication or participation of those feelings and sentiments that constitute a true brotherhood.
2
The communications of Lodges are regular or stated and special or emergent. Regular communications are held under the provision of the by-laws, but special communications are called by order of the Master. It is a regulation that no special communication can alter, amend, or rescind the proceedings of a regular communication.
- Source: Mackey's Encyclopedia of Freemasonry

It is clear in the widely accepted definition that Masonic Communication or Masonic Intercourse is done or consummated in a Tyled Lodge.

Will Fellowships, Mixers, Birthday Celebrations/Parties, and other social activities with the so called Non-Recognized or Clandestine Masons outside a Tyled Lodge be considered Masonic Communication or Masonic Intercourse? Will participation in these activities outside a Tyled Lodge violate the injunction that a Mason is not to hold Masonic Communication or Masonic Intercourse with a Clandestine Mason? Is it within the powers of the Grand Master to declare such social activities outside a Tyled Lodge a violation of Masonic Communication or Masonic Intercourse despite the absence of a clear definition of the same in our Masonic Law Book?

I really find it odd that in the absence of a clear definition of MASONIC COMMUNICATION or MASONIC INTERCOURSE in our Masonic Law Book, it is left to the individual Masons’ perception whether a gathering is a Masonic Communication or not and/or leave it to the discretionary powers of the Grand Master to declare if the same is or is not.. Don’t you think it is about time the authorities in our Grand Jurisdiction come up with the definition of MASONIC COMMUNICATION or MASONIC INTERCOURSE?

In the early part of this year, I wrote and posted in the email an article titled “A SIMPLE WISH FROM A FAITHFUL HEART”. Allow me to share with you this article:

We had experienced how Masons engaged themselves into healthy and at times unhealthy debates on matters pertaining to our Fraternity. Unhealthy because at times it resulted to outright disrespect for one another. This had happened not only inside the Lodge but also outside the Lodge particularly in the course of exchange of emails and text messages and even during fellowship.

For an ordinary Mason with a simple faithful heart, it hurts, really, really hurts.

It is the wish of this faithful heart that each and every Mason respect others’ opinion, belief and understanding on what really our Fraternity stands for. A wish

3
that we Masons can show mankind that we practise mutual respect for one another regardless of color, creed and affiliation.

It is the simple wish of this faithful heart to immediately resolve existing factionalism and divisiveness in our respective Lodges thereby strengthening not only the Lodges but Masonic Districts and Grand Lodges as well.

It is the wish of this faithful heart that the newly elected and appointed officers of each and every Lodge lead the brethren in fulfilling this simple wish.

Finally, it is the simple wish of this faithful heart that as we enter the year 2008, we, Masons, live up, in and outside of our respective Lodges, our continuing commitment to our fraternity, BROTHERLY LOVE .'. RELIEF .'. TRUTH .'. LIBERTY .'. EQUALITY .'. FRATERNITY and make 2008 a true and fulfilling Masonic Year.

This article seems to be allied to the speech of MW REYNATO S. PUNO, PGM on ‘HARMONY” during the 92ND Grand Lodge of the Philippines Annual Communication held in Bacolod City on April 23 to 26, 2008 and the one liner in his speech that stuck in my mind is “HARMONY MUST BE A WAY OF LIFE OF EVERY MASON”.

And in the same occasion, the inaugural speech of the newly installed Grand Master, MW Pacifico “Boy” Aniag, was also on ‘HARMONY” which coincides with his theme for this Masonic Year “HARMONY THE STRENGTH AND BEAUTY OF MASONRY”.

The same word “HARMONY” is also mentioned in the opening and closing of our lodge. “HARMONY BEING THE STRENGTH AND SUPPORT OF ALL SOCIETIES ESPECIALLY OF OUR”.

But is “HARMONY” truly and faithfully practiced in Freemasonry?

Again, allow me to share with you excerpts of the article “A UNIVERSAL MASONRY?” by Bro. Conrad Hann, P.G.M., Deputy Executive Secretary, Masonic Service Association, Deputy Executive Secretary, Masonic Service Association, Washington, D.C. which may help answer this question.

“Masonic universality is labeled ‘just a dream.’ Like the phrase, ‘the pursuit of happiness’…….. In the words of one Masonic encyclopedist, ‘the progress made by the Fraternity in attaining or preserving universality has over the past two centuries been nil’……… Differences in rules of procedure, lack of unity in the fundamental definition of what Freemasonry

4

really is, the intrusion of religious concepts and political prejudices, the excessive size of many Lodges which has robbed the individual member of his importance as a Mason - all these have helped to erode the universality of Freemasonry which is summed up in the fraternal shibboleth, ‘the Brotherhood of Man’…….. Almost every initiate is led to believe that Freemasonry is a world-wide, a ‘universal’ fraternity, which admits to its membership and privileges worthy men of every country, sect, and opinion. He also presumes that Masons everywhere are motivated by the same ideals and that fraternal intercourse is always and everywhere possible…….. It is still a ‘dream’ of dedicated Masons, even though it has never existed in all the relationships which have developed between various groups of the Craft. Are ‘they’ regular? That's a question which still suggests how lacking in universality Freemasonry is……… there are distinct differences in Freemasonry in various regions…….. These differences have very little to do with the ritual and the ceremonies. They are differences of interpretation and definition about what Freemasonry really is and what its most important purpose should be……. No Speculative Mason can deride the dream of a universal Masonry, a universal Brotherhood of Man, without undermining the one common and universal aspiration of the fraternity which has appealed to men in every age and climate. The Brotherhood of Man under the Fatherhood of God is the universal dream of men of good will everywhere who call themselves Masons…….. To abandon that dream is to abandon Freemasonry. To abolish those tenets is to abolish Freemasonry. A Mason must dream if he is to continue his speculative building……… A universal Masonry? Keep dreaming and building; it's on its way!”

Summing up all these, it is my belief and hope that there should never be any hindrance or law prohibiting the communication with non-recognized or clandestine Masons outside a Tyled Lodge thereby fostering Harmony and Brotherly Love among Masons regardless of color, creed and affiliation, give a true meaning to the “Brotherhood of Man under the Fatherhood of God” and fulfill the dream of a Universal Masonry. It is also my honest belief that if there is “Mutual Respect”, the spirit of “Harmony” will be strengthened and eventually put into practice the true meaning of “Brotherly Love, Relief, Truth, Liberty, Equality and Fraternity”.

Together brethren we can achieve all these.

May the GAOTU bless and guide all Masons withersoever dispersed.

Comments on 2008 CIR Report

2008-08-16T21:36:00.004+08:00

2008 Finding BAJA CALIFORNIA BULGARIA YORK GRAND LODGE OF MEXICO MONTENEGRO PARAGUAY PHILIPPINES RUSSIA Bulgaria Supplement: Source: http://www.recognitioncommission.org/2008 Report

PHILIPPINES

The Grand Lodge of the Philippines has provided additional clarification on the situation with Freemasonry in that country. Members in seven of the eighteen Lodges in the Cavite District formed Lodges with the same name, but different numbers, and formed what they call the Independent Grand Lodge of the Philippine Islands, without a legitimate charter. All those members have been expelled from the Grand Lodge of the Philippines. As stated last year, the Grand Lodge of the Philippines is the only Grand Lodge in that country that meets the standards for recognition.

MY PERSONAL COMMENT:

(by Bro. Ben Apacible)

A lodge resolution is deemed approved by a majority vote of the members in attendance (50% + 1). Initially seven lodges of the Masonic District of Cavite namely; Cavite Lodge No. 2, Pilar Lodge No. 15, Bagong Buhay Lodge No. 17, Emilio Aguinaldo Lodge No. 31, Bagong Ilaw Lodge No. 97, La Naval Lodge No. 269, Mendez-Nunez Lodge No. 316 (and the eighth and last to join IGLPI at the start of the year 2006 was Pintong Bato Lodge No. 51) passed Lodge resolutions. Hereunder are the links to copies of five of the seven Lodge Resolutions:

a. Cavite Lodge No. 2 Resolution.

b. Pilar Lodge No. 15 Resolution.

c. Bagong Buhay Lodge No. 17 Resolution

d. Bagong Ilaw Lodge No. 97 Resolution

f. La Naval Lodge No. 269 Resolution 03-06

2. On September 10, 2006, IGLPI informed GLP that IGLPI and its subordinate Lodges were duly, lawfully, legally and regularly constituted. Here under is the link to the copy of the said letter.
a. Letter to GLP September 18, 2006

3. GLP issued Edicts expunging/expelling the members who signed the resolutions and not the Lodge which as a formal body/entity which passed the resolution. I find this odd. Why expel those who signed and not the Lodge. And worth mentioning is “no due process were accorded to the brethren affected by these Edicts” which has been repeatedly taught in Masonry – brotherly love, relief, truth, liberty, equality, and fraternity. Hereunder are some of the Edicts:

a. GLP Edict No. 232 & 232-A.

b. GLP Edict No. 232-B

c. GLP Edict No. 232-C

d. GLP Edict No. 232-D

4. IGLPI satisfies the requirements of REGULARITY and RECOGNITION.

a. Constitutional Basis to Form IGLPI.

5. To this date (August 13, 2008) no justice were accorded to the affected brethren. This was the reason for an appeal to create a Grand Committee to look into this issue. Hereunder are some of the appeal letters sent to the incumbent Grand Master:

a. Petitions 1 and 2

b. Petitions 3, 4, and 5

6. These are the true and correct inputs/information which must be made known to the Commission on Information for Recognition. It is my hope and prayer that this comment/write-up will reach all those concerned and the truth be finally known so that Filipino Masons regardless of Grand Lodge affiliation may live in harmony. For more details, visit the compilation of documents and events in Recent Events in Philippine Masonry.

As the late WB Theron Dunn said “As brothers, we can tie ourselves in knots over the regular/clandestine issue, or we can recognize that regularity is only a tool, one that has served the grand lodges and freemasonry well for almost 300 years. It is a tool for GRAND LODGES, however, and is not a tool of a master mason. We have other tools at our disposal, one of which is the level. Let us, as brothers then, apply the Level to our non tyled meetings. If a person claims to be a Mason, let us, in the spirit of brotherly love, accept the claim on its face and grant them the respect they are due as masons. Leave the issues of regularity to the grand lodges to wrangle over.”

Petitions to GLP

2008-08-16T21:32:00.002+08:00

Petition 3, 4 and 5

2008-08-16T21:27:00.001+08:00

An Appeal For Support

2008-06-07T06:15:00.002+08:00

An appeal for support from the members of the Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of F&AM of the Philippines (WMs, DDGMs, PMs, PDDGMs, incumbent and past Grand Line Officers).

Fraternal greetings brethren!

For almost two years now, we, the brethren of this Grand Jurisdiction, are still in the dark on the real root causes(s) of the schism of several Lodges in the Province of Cavite which led to the creation of the Independent Grand Lodge of the Philippine Island (IGLPI).

No formal investigation/inquiry was ever conducted nor the real root cause(s) ever made known formally to the brethren. This resulted in speculations, hearsay and unpleasant exchange of remarks which is unhealthy and which does not speak well of a fraternity or a brotherhood such as ours.

The theme, “Harmony, the Strength and Beauty of Masonry”, of our Grand Master, MW Pacifico B. Aniag, is enough proof of his sincerity and enthusiasm to bring back “Harmony” in our Grand Jurisdiction…”Harmony” we all once enjoyed.

I have initiated an effort by members of the Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of F&AM of the Philippines (WM, PM, DDGM, PDDGM, incumbent and past Grand Line Officers) for the creation of a Grand Committee to investigate/evaluate the root cause(s) of this unfortunate event in Philippine Masonry. The Grand Committee’s findings, recommendation(s) and/or decision to be made known formally to the Brethren and finally put to rest this particular issue.

I am appealing to the members of the Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of F&AM of the Philippines to support this effort and let us help our Grand Master in his quest for “Harmony” in this Grand Jurisdiction.

Please find attached the letter to our Grand Master. Please print copies of the same and help me get as much number of members of the GLP to support this effort.

Likewise, may I request that original copies with signatures be sent to me by mail on or before June 30, 2008 at the below address for consolidation and ultimate submission personally to our Grand Master.

MEDARDO BENJAMIN APACIBLE
26-26 J.P. RIZAL STREET, NEW CAPITOL ESTATES I
COMMONWEALTH AVENUE, QUEZON CITY

Thank you so much for your cooperation and deep concern for our fraternity and may the GAOTU bless and guide all Masons withersoever dispersed.

Bro. Ben Apacible
Kalilayan Lodge No. 37, Lucena City
Araw Lodge No. 18, Manila

----------------------------------------------------

MW PACIFICO B. ANIAG
GRAND MASTER
MOST WORSHIPFUL GRAND LODGE OF F &AM OF THE PHILIPPINES
1440 San Marcelino Street, Ermita, Manila

Dear MW Sir,

Fraternal greetings.

We, the undersigned members of the Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of F&AM of the Philippines, respectfully request the creation of a Grand Committee to investigate/evaluate the root cause(s) of the schism of a number of Cavite Lodges which led to the creation of the Independent Grand Lodge of the Philippine Island (IGLPI).

To this date after almost two years, the root cause(s) are not clearly known to the brethren of this Grand Jurisdiction. Due to the absence of a formal investigation on this matter, this unfortunate event in the history of Philippine Masonry resulted to speculations, hearsays, exchange of unpleasant remarks which we find unhealthy in a fraternity or brotherhood such as ours.

It is our fervent hope that with the creation of this Grand Committee, this issue will finally be put to rest, its findings/evaluation/decision be made known formally to the brethren and have once more true Harmony that once prevailed in our Grand Jurisdiction. This effort of ours is in support to your theme “Harmony, the Strength and Beauty of Masonry”.

May the GAOTU bless and guide all Masons withsoever dispersed.

Fraternally and respectfully yours,

.
___________________________

Signature over printed name

___________________________

Print Lodge name and number

___________________________
Signature over printed name

___________________________
Print Lodge name and number

Enemies List

2008-02-18T00:27:00.002+08:00

by W:.Tim Bryce, PM, MPS
timb001@phmainstreet.com
Palm Harbor, Florida, USA

"A Foot Soldier for Freemasonry"

"Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer." - Sun-tzu, Chinese general & military strategist (-400 BC)

During the Watergate years of the 1970's, it was discovered that the Nixon Administration was maintaining an "Enemies List" of any and all antagonists to the policies of the White House. This became a "Who's Who" which included radical extremists, political opponents, members of the press, labor leaders, financiers, celebrities, even athletes. The activities of the people on the list were closely scrutinized by the administration and where necessary, life was made difficult for them by the administration. This, of course, was not without precedence as Lyndon Johnson had J.Edgar Hoover of the FBI monitor the activities of select rivals as well. I'm certain Nixon and Johnson were not alone in this regard, both before and after Watergate. Such enemy lists are developed for political purposes and opens the door for "dirty tricks" to be played on people whose names appear on them.

It has come to my attention that a similar type of list is being maintained and circulated within Freemasonry. In other words, a list of Masonic trouble makers to be wary of. I might understand such a list being maintained on a jurisdictional basis, but what I am hearing of is a secret list that is being circulated among Grand jurisdictions at the highest levels. I don't know if there is any truth in this, but it wouldn't surprise me.

I suspect if you are placed on this list, your actions are being closely watched and any infraction of the rules are reported accordingly. Even close Masonic friends whom you normally trust are charged with monitoring your activity. I know such talk smacks of paranoia, but it makes you wonder what is being recorded in your membership jacket at Grand Lodge.

The people I suspect are on such a Masonic enemies list are all Brothers who have vocalized their discontent with current policies of the Grand Lodges. They are not people who want to see the fraternity destroyed, but rather improved and brought into the 21st century; people who can think beyond the confines of the Lodge room and jurisdictional boundaries; Brothers who believe in the universality of Freemasonry and how it should be run.

If, in fact, such a list exists, I would probably consider it an Honor Roll of Masons, a sort of Red Badge of Courage for speaking from the heart and trying to improve the status quo. In all likelihood, if you rock the boat you can probably expect to be added to the list. More importantly, the existence of such a list would be proof that Freemasonry has been politicized which would be scarier than just appearing on the list. After all, we should be acting more like Masons than like the Mafia.

Keep the Faith.

Article reprinted with permission of the author and www.FreemasonInformation.com
Please forward me a copy of the publication when it is produced.

To receive notices of Tim's writings, subscribe to his Discussion Group.

You can also "tune in" to Bro. Tim's audio podcasts at the "Lodgeroom International" (UK): http://podcast.lodgeroominternational.com/

Also be sure to check out Tim's "Pet Peeve of the Week" (non-Masonic related) at: http://www.phmainstreet.com/timbryce.htm

Copyright © 2007 by Tim Bryce. All rights reserved.

*** repost from From the Edge with permission. Thank you.

Letter from GLP GM Gonzales

2008-02-18T00:00:00.006+08:00

WHERE ARE THE FILIPINO MASONS OF TODAY?

2008-02-17T07:06:00.005+08:00

Today our country is faced with so many uncertainties. Corruptions in government, questionable elections results, violations of human rights, abuse of authority , are major concerns which have destroyed the very principles our fore fathers have fought for. Concerns which have been taken for granted by a big number of Filipinos, concerns which have been denounced by civic, business and religious organizations, concerns which have destroyed the very moral fiber of our society.

We have been exchanging thoughts and ideas on why our country, the Philippines, have not moved forward, have been over taken by other Asian Countries, where the poor gets poorer and the rich get richer, where families have to be separated because heads of families have to work abroad.

We Masons are so proud of our history. We talk proudly how Filipino Masons led revolutions against Spain, how Filipino Masons led the Philippines to freedom and independence. We proudly share articles on the legacy of Filipino Masons in Philippine history.

In recent history, we Masons were proud on the roles played by Masons particularly the EDSA Revolution.

Prior to the latest scandal that rocked our country, Masons were in the front line who exposed the ills in government which led us to our present state. I am referring to BRO. SAMMY ONG, BRO. BOY GUDANI, BRO. ALEX BALUTAN, BRO. DANNY LIM.

The “Lozada Testimony” has provided the spark that ignited the prairie fire that is threatening to incinerate the very cause of these uncertainties. And right before our eyes the “fire fighters” are exerting their utmost best to extinguish the fire.

The “Lozada Testimony” has strengthened what BROTHERS ONG, GUDANI, BALUTAN and LIM earlier exposed.

This is not about POLITICS nor about FREEMASONRY as a fraternity but individual Filipino Masons of today. This is the future of our country which is on the line. This is about the future of our children – the future of the next generation. It is up to the individual’s perception of events to make his decision and answer these questions.

How shall we now answer the question “WHERE ARE THE FILIPINO MASONS OF TODAY?”

Will the Filipino Masons of today just be fence sitters?

Will the Filipino Masons of today continue the legacy of fore fathers who stood up and fought for what is morally right?

Will the Filipino Masons of today be proud of what they did at the time the Philippines needed them?

Brethren this is the only country we have. Please pass this email to the brethren as a sign of your concern as a Filipino.

It is about time that we revisit, read once again and internalized the speech of MW REYNATO S. PUNO, PGM and CHIEF JUSTICE during the 109th Independence Day celebration.

Thank you and may the GAOTU bless, guide and strengthen every Filipino Mason withersoever dispersed.

Fraternally yours,

Bro. Ben Apacible
Kalilayan Lodge No. 37, Lucena City
Araw Lodge No. 18, Manila
Grand Lodge of the Philippines
Current Location: Quezon City

Pagbibigay Kabuluhan sa Kalayaang Natamo Noong 1898

2008-02-17T06:59:00.002+08:00

Punong Mahistrado Reynato S. Puno [1]

HUNYO 12, 1898. Sa araw na ito ating inaalala ang dakilang araw ng ating kalayaan. Taong 1898 ng magtagumpay ang mga Pilipino na mailunsad ang isang pambansang rebolusyon laban sa rehimeng kolonyal ng Espanya. Halos tatlong daang taong nagpunyagi ang mga Pilipino upang makamit ang matagal ng inaasam na kalayaan.

Isang daan at siyam (109) na taon na ang nakakaraan ng ideklara ng rebolusyonaryong gobyerno ang kalayaan ng bansang Pilipinas. Sa pagkakataong yaon iwinagayway ang bughaw, pula at puti na watawat ng Pilipinas upang maging simbulo ng ating aspirasyon tungo sa pagiging isang tunay na bansa.[2] Doon din ay pinatugtog ang marcha nacional para isambulat sa sangkatauhan ang isang paninindigan—na ang bansang Pilipinas ay isang bansang Malaya.

Ayon sa mga talaan na nasa pangangalaga ng ating National Historical Institute (NHI), noong ika-12 ng Hunyo 1898, nilagdaan ng ilang mga Pilipino at ng isang Amerikano, si Koronel L.M. Johnson sa harap ng notaryong (na naging War Counsellor) si Ambrosio Rizanzares Bautista, ang dokumentong Declaration of Philippine Independence. Ang paglagda sa dokumentong ito ay ipinag-utos ni Hen. Emilio Aguinaldo sa tulong at proteksiyon ng bansang Estados Unidos. Ayon sa dokumentong ito, ang Pilipinas, sa pangunguna ng rebolusyonaryong gobyerno ni Hen. Aguinaldo ay nagsasarili mula sa pagiging lupang-sakop ng gobyerno ng Espanya. Idineklara din sa dokumentong ito na ang Pilipinas at ang bawat mamamayan nito ay magtatamasa na ng tinatawag na “political and economic rights” na siyang nararapat sa isang bansang malaya.[3]
Nakasulat sa dokumentong ito (Declaration of Philippine Independence) ang mga naging dahilan ng rebolusyon.

Naririyan ang pagiging sawa na ng mga Pilipino sa pagiging alipin ng ibang bansa. Nandun din ang mga “arbitrary arrest” na ginawa ng mga guwardya sibil at ang mga pagpatay ng walang katarungan na maihahalintulad sa “extrajudicial killing” sa ating kapanahunan. Nandun din ang pangangamkam ng mga lupa at pag-aari ng mga makapangyarihan, na imbes magtaguyod ng nararapat nilang tungkulin ay naging ganid sa kapangyarihan at kayamanan. Naririyan din ang kawalan ng edukasyon ng mamamayan na lalong nakadagdag sa pagiging mahirap at api ng mga Pilipino. Naririyan din ang “deportation” o pagpapa-alis ng mga illustrado o iyong mga nakapag-aral sa ibang bansa at nagtataguyod ng pagtuturo sa mga Pilipino ng mapagpalayang mga pananaw.

Kung may lugar na dapat kilalanin na puso ng himagsikan, ito ay ang Kalookan. Ang salitang “caloocan” ay nagmula sa lantay na Tagalog na lo-ok; kalook-lookan o kaloob-looban. Dito sa Lungsod ng Kalookan dapat mas maigting ang pag-alaala sa ating mga bayani. Sa isang maliit na tahanan sa gitna ng Kalookan, doon tumira ang bayaning si Andres Bonifacio. Bagamat ipinanganak si Bonifacio sa Tondo, Maynila, siya ay lumaki at naghanap-buhay dito sa Kalookan. Siya na tinaguriang Supremo ng Kataas-taasang Kagalang-galangang Katipunan ng mga Anak ng Bayan ay dito sa lugar na ito nagpunla ng mga binhi ng rebolusyon noong Hulyo 7, 1892.

Makasaysayang gunitain natin sa lugar ding ito ang kanilang mga ginawa. Mula sa mga maralita ng Kalookan, ay may sumigaw para sa kalayaan at naging Ama ng Rebolusyong Pilipino. Ang pagpunit ng cedula at ang pagsigaw sa Pugadlawin (na dating sakop ng Kalookan) ni Gat. Andres Bonifacio ang siyang pinakamakulay na imahe ng rebolusyon. Mula sa pagiging isang simpleng magsosombrero at peyon, nagmula ang pinuno ng grupong nagtataguyod ng kalayaan. Matapos ang ginawang pagpunit ng cedula ng mga katipunero ay ang mga sunod-sunod na pag-aalsa sa walong probinsiya ng Pampanga, Bulacan, Maynila, Cavite, Batangas, Laguna, Morong (ngayon ay Rizal), at Nueva Ecija. At humangga ito sa lubos na pakikidigma ng mga Pilipino laban sa gobyernong Kastila.

Hanggang sa maitatag ang rebolusyonaryong gobyerno na siyang nagdeklara ng ating kalayaan noong Hunyo 12, 1898.

Naririto tayo ngayon sa puntod ng paggunita sa kadakilaan ni Supremo Andres Bonifacio. Marapat lamang na alalahanin natin ang mga ginawa ni Supremo Bonifacio, maging ng lahat ng mga katipunero at iba pang mga bayani natin, sa kanilang pagbubuwis ng buhay alang-alang sa kalayaan ng Pilipino.

Nang sagupain nila ang mga dayuhang mananakop, sila ay walang katiyakan na mananalo. Wala silang kakilalang maimpluwensiya. Wala silang kapangyarihan sa lipunan. Wala silang sapat na kakayahang militar. Wala rin silang dalang yaman kundi ang pag-asa na sa kinabukasan sila ay lalaya—at kung hindi man sila, ang kanilang mga anak ay lalaya.

Sa lugar na pinagdanakan ng kanilang dugo ay naroroon ang mga tirahan ngayon ng mga taong tinuturing natin na malaya. Malaya dahil hindi na nasasakop ng ibang bansa.

Ngunit kamustahin naman natin ang kalagayan ng mga taong naturingan na malaya.
Totoo na nakamit natin ang isang uri ng kalayaan: ang tinatawag na “political independence” o kalayaang nauukol sa pamamalakad ng gobyerno. Hindi na tayo nasasakop ng liping banyaga. Ngunit tanungin natin, ano ang kalagayan ng Filipino ngayon? Mayroon na ba siyang dangal na matatawag? Totoo bang taas noo na siya kahit kanino? Sapagkat ang ipinaglaban ng mga bayani ay hindi abstraktong ideya, marapat lamang tayong mamuhay ng may dangal. May sapat na kabuhayan, may pinagkukunan ng maihahanda sa hapag-kainan, may edukasyon para sa mga kabataan, at may paghahanda para sa pagtanda ng mga tao sa lipunan.

Kung ito ang diwa ng rebolusyong 1898 ang makamit ang dangal ng bawat isang Filipino sa pamamagitan ng paghahangad ng kalayaan; kung gayon ay hindi pa tapos ang laban.
Hanggang salat pa rin ang Filipino sa kakulangan ng edukasyon, hindi pa tayo malaya. Hindi maaaring maging malaya ang isang taong hindi nakakaunawa ng kaniyang karapatan at responsibilidad sa lipunan. Hangga’t may nagdarahop at nililisan ang ating bayan dahilan sa kawalan pag-asa sa kinabukasan, ay hindi pa rin tayo lubos na malaya. Hanggang may naglalahad ng kamay sa lansangan at napipilitan gumawa ng krimen upang mabuhay, hindi tayo malaya. Hanggang may nalalapastangan na sagradong boto ng kahit isa lamang mamamayan, hindi pa rin tayo malaya. Hanggang may Pilipino na hindi maitaas ang kaniyang noo sa kaniyang pagiging Pilipino, hindi tayo malaya. Ang kalayaan ay kaakibat ng dangal. Ang isang taong malaya ay isang taong may dangal—buo at kumpleto ang kaniyang pagkatao. Hindi siya alipin ninoman at hindi nadidiktahan maliban na lamang ng sarili niyang kunsensiya.

Ito ang damdaming nagbunsod sa ating mga bayani upang makipaglaban para sa kalayaan. Ang paghahangad ng dangal bilang isang tao. Ito ang nagtulak sa mga bayani natin, sikat man o hindi, upang iwaksi ang sarili at gumawa para sa bayan. Ang paghahangad din ng dangal ang dahilan bakit sila nakipaglaban hanggang kamatayan. Nandoon ang karangalan na sa pagpapantay ng iyong paa sa hukay ay maaalaala ng iyong mga kasambahay, hindi man ng sambayanan, na sa iyong buhay ay nakatayo ka ng tuwid at wala kang ginawang pagluhod sa kabuktutan.

Ang pinakamataas na uri ng dangal ay yaong nagmumula sa pagiging isang matuwid na kaanib sa ating bayan. May dangal ang taong masipag na naghahandog ng bahagi ng kanilang kabuhayan para sa ating buwis. May dangal ang taong nagtitiis sumunod sa ating mga batas upang mapanatili ang kaayusan at katahimikan. May dangal ang taong naglilingkod ng tapat, kahit tahimik, sa ating gobyerno para sa ating lipunan. May dangal ang bawat Pilipino na sa kanilang pag-gawa sa araw-araw ay iniisip nila ang pagtulong sa kapwa at hindi ang kung paano makapang-lalamang.

Sundin natin ang payo ni Apolinario Mabini, na nagsabing, “pagsakitan mo ang kaginhawahan ng iyong bayan ng higit sa iyong sarili at pagpilitan mong siya’y pagharian ng kabaitan, ng katuwiran at ng kasipagan: sapagka’t kung maginhawa siya’y pilit ding giginhawa ikaw at iyong kasambahay at kamaganakan.”[4]

Nararapat na ating alalahanin ang kabayanihan ng mga naunang nakipaglaban para sa ating kalayaan. Ngunit higit natin ngayong pahalagahan ang ating landas na patutunguhan. Hindi tayo dapat mawalan ng pag-asa sa karamihan ng kamalian at kabulukan na maaaring nanalaiti sa ating sistema. Kung ang kalayaan ay ating nakamit—bakit hindi ang kabaitan at kasarapan ng isang lipunang mapag-aruga?

Mayroon pa nga bang magtataguyod sa Pilipino kung hindi kapwa Pilipino? Aling bayan ba ang dapat na mag-aruga sa isang Pilipino kung hindi ang Pilipinas? Huwag na nating hayaan na maulit ang kamatayang sinapit ni Supremo Andres Bonifacio sa kamay ng sarili niyang kababayan. Si Bonifacio ay pinatay sa Bundok Nagpatong noong Mayo 10, 1897 ni Major Lazaro Makapagal sa pag-uutos ni Hen. Mariano Noriel—mga Pilipino rin. Huwag na nating hayaan na sa paghahangad ng sariling pakinabang ay ipagkanulo natin ang ating sariling bayan.
Ang puntong kailangan natin maituldok sa araw na ito ay ang matanto natin sa pamamagitan ng pag-aalaala natin kung naging sino tayo bilang Filipino, upang maituro natin kung sino tayo magiging sa kinabukasan.

Namatay si Bonifacio na gaya ng sinapit ni Elias sa nobela ni Jose Rizal na Noli Me Tangere. Hindi niya nakita ang kalayaan ng bansang Pilipinas. Bagaman hindi nila nakita ang kalayaang ating tinamo, naroroon pa rin ang kanilang pag-asa na ang bayang ito ay magiging maginhawa at matiwasay pagdating ng panahon.

Ang ating kalayaan sa kasalukuyan ay mga pananaw at mga pangarap ng ating mga ninuno. Ang ating kasalukuyan ay hindi na nakita ng mga dakilang yumao. Maaaring ang ating kinabukasan ay iiwan din natin para na lamang sa ating mga anak at mga kaapo-apuhan. Ngunit ang bayan nating ito na pinag-alayan ng maraming buhay at kabuhayan—ito ay mananatili. Bagamat napakahalaga na magpakasipag tayo para sa ating ikagiginhawa sa kasalukuyan, isipin natin na may nakipaglaban noon para sa atin upang makamit natin ang ngayon. Utang na loob natin sa mga nagsipag noon, na tayo’y magpakasipag hindi lamang para sa ngayon kung ‘di para sa bukas ng ating bayan.

At sa tanging dokumentong natitira sa panulat ni Supremo Andres Bonifacio, ang kaniyang tulang pinamagatang Pag-Ibig sa Tinubuang Lupa, doon ay kaniyang isinulat:
“Pagpupuring lubos ang palaging hangad/ sa bayan ng taong may dangal na ingat/ Umawit, tumula, kumatha’t sumulat/ kalakhan din niya’y isinisiwalat.”[5]

Ating ipakita sa mundo—na sa dakong Silangan, doon may isang magiting na bayan—isang Bayang Magiliw, tunay na perlas sapagkat malinis at kaakit-akit. Isang hindi matatawarang bayan na ang mga naninirahan ay mga taong dakila—mga taong may dangal. Mga taong tunay na malaya.

Kaawaan tayong lahat ng Poong-Maykapal at nawa ay pagpalain pa Niya ang Pilipinas!

Salamat po.

[1] Talumpati sa pagdiriwang ng 109 Kalayaan ng Pilipinas, sa Andres Bonifacio National Monument, Lungsod ng Kalookan, Hunyo 12, 2007.
[2] “Declaration of Philippine Independence, 12 June 1898 [isinalin mula sa Espanyol]” galing sa Laws of the First Philippine Republic. Manila: National Historical Institute, 1972. Pahina 203-6.
[3] Id.
[4] Apolinario Mabini, Panukala sa Pagkakana ng Republika ng Pilipinas 1-7 (1898).
[5] Andres Bonifacio, Pag-Ibig sa Tinubuang Lupa, nasa pag-iingat ng National Museum.

Summary

2007-06-29T10:10:00.007+08:00

RECENT EVENTS IN PHILIPPINE MASONRY

by Ben Apacible, PDGGM

TRADITION? UNWRITTEN LAW? HARMONY? It is known that some Masonic Districts in the jurisdiction of the GLP follow an old time “tradition” and “unwritten law” on the rotation of District Deputy Grand Masters (DDGMs). District councils nominate a brother who is acceptable to the brethren of the District to the incoming Grand Master. In this manner “harmony” is assured.

Some Masonic Districts which follow this “tradition” and “unwritten law” are Masonic Districts 2 (R IV-B), 8 (R IV-C), 10 (R IV-D), 13 (NCR-G), 25 (R III-B), 27 (R III-C), 29 (R III-D) and 49 (R II-C).

As early as December 2005, there were rumors that the incoming Grand Master have sounded off his DDGM appointees and many of those who have been recommended by District Councils will not be appointed.

This rumor continued to spread until the early part of March 2006. The following month, April 2006, this rumor turned out to be true and factual and these appointments started to affect the “harmony” in the Masonic Districts concerned.

The questions on “HONOR”, “RESPECT”, and “PREROGATIVE” were raised after the official appointments were made known to the brethren.

Should the incoming Grand Master “honor” and “respect the old time “tradition” and “unwritten law” of some Masonic Districts?

- or –

Should these concerned Masonic Districts “honor” and “respect” the decision of the incoming Grand Master?

Should the incoming Grand Master sacrifice “harmony” and favor his “prerogative”?

Is this more than just “appointments” - is there something deeper and personal that the incoming Grand Master considered in his appointments?

These questions remain unsatisfactorily unanswered to this date.

In December 2005, the Past Grand Masters selected from a list of nominees seven (7) official candidates for the position of Junior Grand Warden to be elected during the 90th Annual Communication to be held in Cebu City on April 27 to 29, 2006. They were Brothers Ed Perez, Manning Lee, Eduard Chua, Peter Lim Lo Soy, Boy Pique, Peter Aragon and Ben Apacible. Brother Boy Pique declined the nomination.

The names of the six (6) official candidates, their pictures, biodata and respective programs for the fraternity were circulated to all the Lodges in the Grand Jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of the Philippines. It was also published in the first quarter issue of the Cabletow, the official magazine of the GLP.

30

The 90th Annual Communication was well attended and noticeably more
brethren from Luzon attended this ANCOM as compared to other ANCOMs held outside outside of Luzon.

On April 28, 2006, the day of the election of the Grand Lights and other elective Grand Positions, to be exact an hour before the said elections, Past Grand Master Rudyardo Bunda announced to the attending brethren that only three (3) of the six (6) official candidates were found “worthy” for the position of Junior Grand Warden and they were Brothers Ed Perez, Peter Lim Lo Suy and Peter Aragon. The other three (3) Brothers Eduard Chua, Manning Lee and Ben Apacible were disqualified.

This announcement literally “brought the house down” and chaos erupted. There were lots of legal questions asked and objection raised. No answer (s) satisfied the brethren in attendance. The past Grand Masters thru PGM Bunda stood firm in their decision. As a result more than fifty percent (50%) of the voting delegates walked out of the plenary hall – a first in the history of the GLP. Despite the lack of quorum and consideration for valid questions asked and objections raised from the brethren, the Chair of the ELECOM, upon the direction of the PGMs proceeded with the elections and Brother Peter Lim Lo Suy won as Junior Grand Warden.

Questions were again raised as result of this incident.

Was this ANCOM tailored for a favored candidate?

Were the PGMs present transparent with the brethren in attendance?

Where is “justice”, “truth” and “brotherly love”?

Where the “charges” against the three (3) disqualified candidates truly
as well as justly verified?

Were these three (3) disqualified candidates informed of the “charges”
and were they given due process before they were “sentenced”?

How can the PGMs be the “prosecutor”, “judge” and “executioner” all
at the same time?

Are ANCOMs only for the selected few and not the brethren
in attendance?

To this date, the disqualified candidates were never officially informed of the “charge(s)” leveled against them by the PGMs. Jokingly, the three disqualified candidates have been called “unworthy” by the brethren.

On May 17, 2006, the GLP issued Circular Number 4 – Yu with the subject “Our Last Election for Junior Grand Warden and the On Going Electoral Reforms”. (see pages 1 – 4 References)

This Circular explained the provisions of the New Electoral Reform and GM Yu pleaded for unity for Masonry to move forward. However, majority of the brethren interpreted this Circular as “to calm down the brethren” and to cover up the real motive(s) of trimming down the candidates from six (6) to three(3).

On May 23, 2006, Brother Ben Apacible convened a group of concerned Masons from Southern Tagalog, National Capital Region and Central Luzon

31

in Angeles City and discussed electoral reforms and to call for a Special Communications which needed the signatures of one third of the total regular incumbent Worshipful Masters. (see page 15 Reference, News Bulletin)

It was agreed that letters to the incumbent Worshipful Masters will be sent to the members of the core group in attendance for distribution. Forms ofLodge Resolution and Call for Special Communication and the Proposed Amendments to the Rules Governing the Election of Junior Grand Warden will be attached to the said letter. (see pages 5 – 12 References)

Brother Ben Apacible gave advance copies of the letter and attachments to PGM Danilo Angeles, Grand Secretary of the GLP, for his information and so as for the group’s intention not to be misinterpreted.

On May 30, 2006, the GLP issued Circular Number 10-Yu with subject “Proposals on Electoral Reforms”. This Circular encouraged the Lodges to submit to the GLP resolutions for electoral reforms and that MW Yu was open for a Special Communication. (see pages 13 – 14 Reference)

The timing of the issuance of this Circular is “suspicious” and “probably malicious”. Was this Circular intended to “kill” the effort of the concerned Masons whose convenor was Brother Ben Apacible, one of the three (3) candidates unjustly disqualified during the 90th ANCOM in Cebu City. Did Brother Ben Apacible commit a mistake of giving in good faith advance copies to the Grand Secretary?

Meanwhile, on May 3, 2006, a group of concerned Master Masons of Cavite met and discussed the violation of the “gentlemen’s agreement” since 1986 that the DDGM to be appointed shall come from the host Lodge of the Annual District Convention of Masonic District 2 (R IV-A)” which had been violated by GLP GM Yu. The group called themselves Kapulungan ng mga Kapatid sa Kabite (KKK). (see page 15 Reference, News Bulletin)

As of June 2006, many Lodges of Masonic District 2 (R IV-A) had no
Grand Lodge Inspectors. Many Past Masters declined the appointment. Brother Jimmy Bantolo was chosen by the group as the convenor of KKK. (see pages 15 – 16, Reference, KKK, News Bulletin Nr 2 Chaos in Masonic District 2 (R IV-A) escalated. (see pages 15 – 22 References)

On July 4, 2006, Emails were received from Masonic District 16 (R VIII-A). These were “Resolution Number R VIII-A-1 dated June 24, 2006 Enjoining the Most Worshipful Grand Master to Declare the Election and Subsequent Installation of the Junior Grand Warden during the 90th Annual Communication, as Irregular and Unconstitutional; and therefore, Null and Void” and “Resolution Number R VIII-A-2 dated June 24, 2006 Resolution Expressing Support to the Manifesto Calling for Autonomy by the Brethren of Masonic District Number R VIII-B (18)”. (see pages 22 – 26 References)

On July 10, 2006, an Email from Tacloban City brethren was sent. This is a Manifesto and their Declaration of Independence from the Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the Philippines. (see pages 26 – 31 Reference)

As of this writing, it is not known whether this “manifesto” became a

32

reality. From a very reliable source, the GLP’s counter offer to the brethren of Region VIII was a “Regional Grand Lodge” but will be under the GLP.

Will our brethren from Region VIII make true their threat during the chaotic day of the 90th ANCOM in Cebu City to put up their own Grand Lodge which they have re echoed to the whole Grand Jurisdiction in the succeeding months? To this date nothing has been heard from them.

More chaos in Masonic District 2 (R IV-A) in July 2006. GLP MW Yu sent a letter to the Worsipful Master of Pilar Lodge 15 to explain the complaint of DDGM Mario Marasigan that he was refused entry to the said Lodge. (see page 31 - 32 Reference, KKK NEWS BULLETIN NR 06)

Also on the same month GLP MW Yu issued suspension orders to the Worshipful Masters of Lodge 15, Bagong Buhay Lodge 17 and La Naval Lodge 269 all due to the refusal to admit DDGM Marasigan. PGMs Beltan and Bunda, DDGM Marasigan and Brother Joseph Capuyan had a dialogue to preserve peace and harmony in Cavite but to no avail. (see page 32 - 33 Reference, KKK NEWS BULLETIN NR 7)

On July 19, 2006, Brother Ben Apacible, convenor of concerned Masons called for a meeting of the core group in Manila. In attendance were concerned Masons of Southern Tagalog, NCR, Central Luzon and Cagayan Valley. This meeting was also attended by brethren from Region VIII. It was during this meeting that Brother Ben Apacible reported that their initiative to call for a Special Communication is “dead”. The timing of the issuance of GLP Circular Number 10 – Yu caused the confusion in the Blue Lodges. Incumbent Worshipful Masters confused the group’s initiative as the same as that of GLP Circular 10 –Yu where in GM Yu encouraged Lodges to submit electoral Reform Resolutions and that he is open to a call for a Special Communication. As expected the timing of the issuance of this GLP Circular was very good as it totally “killed” the group’s initiative. Brother Ben Apacible then left it up to the concerned Masons to decide, individually or collectively, on what the next step to take. (see page 33 - 34 Reference, KKK NEWS BULLETIN NR 08)

On July 29, 2006, the Board of General Purposes of the GLP held a dialogue with the Cavite Brethren in Noveleta, Cavite then later in the residence of Brother Jimmy Bantolo. Issues on appointment, suspension orders, the special communication and other pertinent issues were discussed. However, to this date nothing concrete had been resolved. (see page 33 – 34 Reference, KKK NEWS BULLETIN NR 08)

During the first two (2) weeks of August 2006 more meetings and discussions on issues were held by the KKK brethren. (see pages 34 – 36 Reference, KKK NEWS BULLETIN NRS 09 & 10)

On August 18, 2006, GLP GM Yu asked for a "caucus"with the brethren of Batangas. The “caucus” was held in Batangas Lodge Number 35 in Batangas City. Before the start of the “caucus”, the Grand Secretary, MW Danilo Angeles who accompanied the GLP Grand Master, ruled on the “Masonic Protocol” that once the Grand Master speaks no one else can further speak. The question was raised “then why call this meeting a caucus”? The “Masonic Protocol” ruling prevailed. At the end of the “caucus” the brethren left dissatisfied on the manner how the “caucus” was conducted. All their queries were answered by the Grand Secretary. (see page 36 Reference)

33

On August 18, 2006, La Naval Lodge Number 269, Masonic District 2 (R IV-A) passed Resolution 03-06 Declaring the Lodge Dissolved and Consents to be Governed by Another Grand Lodge. (see pages 37 – 39 Reference)

On August 21, 2006, Bagong Buhay Lodge Number 17, Masonic District 2 (R IV-A) passed Resolution Nr 02 Declaring the Lodge Dissolved and Consents to be Governed by Another Grand Lodge. (see pages 40 – 42 Reference)

Only a few of the brethren of Masonic District 2 (R IV-A) attended the Southern Tagalog Multi District Convention Held in Tayabas, Quezon. (see page 43 Reference, KKK NEWS BULLETIN NR 11)

More discussions on appointments and issues were discussed by the KKK. (see pages 44– 46 Reference, ISSUES AND CONCERNS SERIES NR 6)

On September 1, 2006, Cavite Lodge Number 2, Masonic District 2 (R IV-A) passed a Resolution Declaring Independence from the Grand Lodge of the Philippines. (see pages 47– 49 Reference)

On September 2, 2006, Bagong Ilaw Lodge Number 97, Masonic District 2 (R IV-A) passed Resolution Nr 2 Declaring Independence from the Grand Lodge of the Philippines. (see pages 50 – 52 References)

Also on September 2, 2006, Pilar Lodge Number 15, Masonic District 2 (R IV-A) passed a Resolution Declaring Independence from the Grand Lodge of the Philippines . (see pages 53 – 56 Reference)

These Lodges which passed Resolutions Declaring Independence from the Grand Lodge of the Philippines cited reasons from the GLP’s “unjust orders” to “poor leadership and governance by the incumbent leadership of the GLP”. This is expected since no actions had been taken by the GLP leadership to address issues and concerns raised by the brethren of these Lodges. Instead of addressing these issues and concerns fuel was added to the already burning and blazing situation by the issuance of “unjust orders” and “total disregard of pleas to address these issues and concerns”.

On September 7, 2006, GLP issued Edict Number 232 and on September 11, 2006 Edict Number 232A. These Edict declared a number of Masons as clandestine and their names expunged form the records of the GLP. Same Edict published the pictures of some of the Masons declared clandestine and warned the brethren of the GLP of a similar fate should they declare indendence from the GLP. (see pages 57 - 62 Reference)

On September 10, 2006, the newly created Independent Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the Philippine Islands issued an official document on their D eclaration of Independence. The details of its organization and constitution is detailed in an Email sent to the brethren on September 11, 2006. (see pages 63 –67 References)

On September 12, 2006, Brother Joseph Capuyan sent an Email to the brethren in reaction to GLP Edict Number 232A. He stated that the GLP can not declare the Independent Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the Philippine Islands (IGLPI) as “clandestine and irregular” because it is an inherent right of Lodges which is found in page 240 of the GLP Constitution 2005 edition. Citing the Doctrine of Exclusive Jurisdiction by

34

Paul Bassel which states “the Commission on Information for Recognition has said that the doctrine of exclusive jurisdiction means that all Lodges chartered by a particular Grand Lodge gives their loyalty only to that Grand Lodge, but there can be Lodges chartered by different Grand Lodges in the same territory. There can be several Grand Lodges in a single geographic territory, all with many Lodges under them, so long as each Lodge gives its loyalty to only one of the Grand Lodges, and the doctrine of exclusive jurisdiction is not violated, according to the 1975 statement by the Commission on Information for Recognition as reported and accepted by the conference of Grand Masters of Masons in North America”. He further explained that a clandestine Mason is “one made in or affiliated with a clandestine Lodge” while a clandestine Lodge is “a body of Freemasons or of those who are improperly claiming to be Freemasons, uniting in a Lodge without the consent of a Grand Lodge, or, although originally legally constituted, continuing to work after the Charter has been revoked” (Mackay, Encyclopedia on Freemasonry). Charters of Lodges which affiliated to the IGLPI have never been revoked. ( see pages 67 – 79 Reference)

On September 12, 2006, MW Jimmy Bantolo, Grand Master of the IGLPI sent an Email to the brethren with the information of the organization and constitution of the IGLPI. (see pages 79 – 80 Reference)

On September 15, 2006, MW Jimmy Bantolo, Grand Master of IGLPI Emailed the brethren and shared with them the Constitution of the IGLPI. ((see pages 80 – 92)

On September 18, 2006, MW Jimmy Bantolo, Grand Master of IGLPI wrote a formal letter to GM Romy Yu of the GLP informing the latter of the creation, organization and constitution of the IGLPI. (see pages 93 – 94)

On September 18, 2006, GLP issued Edict 232 B declaring more masons clandestine and their names expunged from the records of the GLP. (see pages 95 – 97 Reference)

Some time in the last week of September 2006, there were rumors circulating that the Grand Lodge of California had ordered all Lodges in its jurisdiction not to receive the Grand Master of the GLP unless certain conditions have been fulfilled. This rumor spread like wild fire and there were lots of speculations. (see page 98 Reference)

On October 9, 2006, a Filipino Mason based in the jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of California sent an Email to RW Sir Jimmy inquiring about this order and what were these conditions which have to be fulfilled. RW Jimmy replied also by Email that the conditions mentioned in the Grand Lodge of California order was the agreement between the GM of California and MW Ebdane of the GLP is the much delayed issuance of Certificates of Good Standing by the GLP to Filipino Masons petitioning for membership in Lodges under the Grand Lodge of California. He further made mention of Masonic protocol as a main cause for the delay. RW Jimmy also made mention that since there is no improvement in the issuance of CGS, GM Yu decided not to visit the U.S.A. and the letter request is for those who wanted to secure a U.S. visa to join the GM to his U.S. trip. And because there is no improvement in the issuance of CGS the GM of California issued said order. Also mentioned as a cause for the delayed issuance was the non-payment of dues. (see pages 98 – 99 References)

35

More issues and concerns of Cavite brethren such as GLP Edicts declaring clandestine Masons and the Grand Lodge of the Philippines not registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission. (see pages 99 – 105 Reference, ISSUES AND CONCERSN NR 7)

On November 14, 2006, MW Jimmy Bantolo, GM of IGLPI sent an Email to the brethren with the information of the illegal and irregular order of the GLP appointing officers of Lodges affiliated with the IGLPI. These are the Lodges which declared independence from the GLP. (see pages 105 – 107 Reference)

On November 28, 2006, MW Jimmy Bantolo, GM of the IGLPI sent an Email to the brethren with the information that the IGLPI held its first General Assembly on November 25, 2006. (see page 107 - 108 Reference)

During the first week of December 2006, the September-October 2006 issue of the Cabletow was distributed to the Lodges (see pages 109 – 115 Reference.)

It was during the Stated Meeting of Araw Lodge Number 18 at the GLP that Brother Ben Apacible noticed the word “bastardo” printed on page 38 which was part of the article written by Mawi Lazaro, PDDGM (NCR-E) titled “Hard Talk”. (see page 115, [page 38 of Cabletow] Reference)

The word “bastardo” was in reference to the brethren who had been declared clandestine by the GLP.

Brother Ben Apacible called the attention of the brethren of Araw Lodge Number 18 on this article of the Cabletow particularly the use and printing of the word “bastardo”. Brother Apacible moved for the approval of a Lodge resolution asking the Grand Master to explain why such unkind, unchristian and unmasonic word was permitted to be printed in the official organ/magazine of the GLP which finds its way not only in the hands of Masons but also to non-masons. The resolution was unanimously approved.

There were numerous reactions from concerned Masons regarding this Cabletow article and the use of the word “bastardo”. (see pages 116 - 123 Reference)

Still on the issue on the Cabletow article, when the Worshipful Master and members of Araw Lodge Number 18 called on the new Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, MW Reynato Puno, PGM, to present the Lodge Resolution of Congratulations, this Cabletow issue was taken up. MW Puno stated that he is the consultant of the Cabletow but nothing has passed his scrutiny before printing. MW Puno likewise mentioned that the Cabletow is the mouthpiece of the Grand Master and reflects the Grand Lodge of the Philippines. MW Puno suggested that instead of a Lodge Resolution a formal letter be sent to Grand Master Yu. On January 9, 2006 during the Stated meeting of Araw Lodge all brethren in attendance signed this letter and sent same to the Grand Master of the same day. (see pages 140 -141 Reference)

On December 21, 2006, the GLP issued Edict Number 232-C declaring more Masons clandestine and their names expunged from the records of the GLP based to the report of the DDGM of Masonic District 2 (IV-A) that more members of different Lodges in the Province of Cavite attended meetings and affairs of the irregular IGLPI. (see pages 124 – 126)

36

Many brethren learned of this GLP Edict only much later and only thru emails. Many Lodges have not received this GLP Edict as of this writing.

On December 27, 2006 IGLPI came up with a document on the Constitutional Basis to form the IGLPI citing international provisions which supports that the IGLPI satisfies the constitutional basis and standards for recognition of new Grand Lodges. (see pages 127 – 134)

On January 6, 2006, MW Jimmy Bantolo sent an Email to the brethren with the information of GLP Edict 232-C which added confusion in the GLP temple and which ultimately forced Pintong Bato Lodge Number 51, Masonic District 2 (R IV-A) to join IGLPI. (see pages 135 -136 Reference)

Also on January 6, 2006, a member of Pintong Bato Lodge Nr 51 sent an Email to the brethren and broke his silence on this latest issue to wit: on December 9, 2006 fifty (50) members attended their stated meeting and election of officers. The elections went well. Elected Worshipful Master was WB Lamberto Binuncal, PM; SW was WB Murillo, PM; and JW was Brother Almeda. During their Lodge Christmas party on December 17, 2006, their incumbent Worshipful Master who is also the outgoing Worshipful Master with a hand few of the brethren made mention that they are not satisfied with the results of the election and that they are determined not to allow the elected officers to be installed. On December 30, 2006, all elected officers assembled at Trece Martires Lodge to take their proficiency examination. When all were assembled DDGM Marasigan approached the elected officers of Pintong Bato Lodge and showed them GLP Edict 232-C which included Worshipful Master Elect Binuncal and Senior Warden Elect Murillo in the new list of Masons declared clandestine by this edict. The two left the assembly very embarrassed. (see pages 136 – 138 Reference)

Commentary by a Filipino Mason based in the United States of America on clandestine or regular – what is the difference? (see pages 138 – 139 Reference)

On January 18, 2007, GLP issued Edict Number 232D declaring the brethren installed as officers of Pintong Bato Lodge Nr 9 as clandestine Masons. Also on the same date, GLP issued the restoration of VW Efren F. Barcelona, PDGL of Magdiwang Lodge Nr. 238 retored to the GLP after declaring in writing his support to the GLP. This GLP restoration order set the guidelines for the brethren who wants to be retored to the GLP. (see pages 142 – 144 Reference)

On January 23, 2007, MW Jimmy Bantolo, Grand Master of IGLPI, sent an email to the brethren sharing to them the ratified Constitution of the IGLPI. (see pages 145 – 158 Reference)

Questions have been raised on the issuance of GLP Edicts declaring Masons Clandestine and on other issues and concerns which can only be answered by worthy and concerned Masons:

We all know that it takes a majority (50% +1) of members in attendance during Stated Meetings to approve a Lodge Resolution. Why declare the members who signed the resolutions as clandestine and why not expel the Lodges which declared independence from the GLP?

Is GM Yu afraid to expel these Lodges which declared independence from the GLP because some Past Grand Masters belong to these Lodges?

37

Why not let the brethren of these Lodges which declared independence from the GLP who do not want to join the IGLPI or who were against the approved Lodge Resolutions exercise their right to “demit” and affiliate with Lodges under the GLP instead of selective declaration of clandestine Masons?

With regards to GLP Edict 232-C, which came first, the carriage or the horse? It is clear from the email of a Pintong Bato Lodge insider that their election was held on December 9, 2006 and GLP Edict 232-C is dated December 21, 2006 and was shown to the Worshipful Master and Senior Warden elect of Pintong Bato Lodge by DDGM Marasigan on December 30, 2006. Do you smell something fishy?

What happens if GLP Edits 232, 232-A, 232-B, 232-C and 232D will not be approved during the 91st ANCOM in Clark, Angeles City but still those brethren declared clandestine and their respective Lodges insist of remaining with IGLPI, will the Lodges be expelled from the GLP or will the incoming Grand Master sustain selective justice and punish only those who signed the resolutions? Will the incoming Grand Master give the brethren of these Lodges who are against the declaration of independence from the GLP the chance to exercise their right to “demit” from their Mother “clandestine” Lodge and affiliate with GLP Lodges?

Will GLP issue additional Edicts declaring more Masons clandestine?

Will we allow disharmony and confusion in our fraternity to continue and grow or will we move for the recognition of the IGLPI during the 91st ANCOM in Clark, Angeles City and have everlasting harmony in our fraternity?

Will we allow the unforgettable incident during the election of Junior Grand Warden in the 90th ANCOM in Cebu City to happen again or will we push for the approval of the Rules Governing the Election of Junior Grand Warden as proposed by concerned Masons which was suspiciously “killed” by GLP Circular 10-Yu?

Finally, will the selected or the privileged few of the GLP allow our voices to be heard during the 91st ANCOM in Clark, Angeles City?

---------

THROUGH PRAYERS THE GAOTU HEARS MORE THAN WE SAY, ANSWERS MORE THAN WE ASK, GIVES MORE THAN WE DESIRE. LET US BE ONE IN PRAYER TO THE GAOTU AND ASK FOR EVERLASTING HARMONY IN OUR FRATERNITY”

WHY NOT

2007-04-30T04:18:00.000+08:00

RmOlano

29Apr07

If a Brother could join multiple Lodges which meet in the same building and remain civil to all, I cannot comprehend why this example of Brotherly Love cannot be exemplified in the Grand Lodge level. The display of gang-like mentality of “they” and “us” could possibly be overcome by more serious contemplation of what is meant by a concept called---Freemasonry.

For full text: Exist in Harmony.

The Burning Taper: Filipino Masons challenge edicts calling them 'clandestine'#links

2007-04-20T13:25:00.000+08:00

The Burning Taper: Filipino Masons challenge edicts calling them 'clandestine'#links

Reasons Why ANCOM should Nullify Edicts 231, 232-A to D .

Reasons to Nullify GLP Edicts No. 232,232-A to D

2007-04-15T22:32:00.000+08:00

REASONS WHY THE ANCOM SHOULD
NULLIFY EDICTS NO. 232, 232-A to D

(by Ben Apacible,PDDGM)

On September 7, 2006, MW Romeo A. Yu issued Edict No. 232 declaring twenty-nine (29) brethren of Pilar Lodge No. 15 as clandestine masons. This was later followed by Edicts 232-A, 232-B, 232-C, and 232-D, declaring more brethren as clandestine masons.

The aforesaid edicts have no factual and legal bases under Masonic law and therefore should be disapproved.

1. The brethren mentioned in the Edicts are not clandestine Masons. - Mackey’s Encyclopedia on Masonry defined “clandestine mason” as “one made in or affiliated with a clandestine Lodge”; on the other hand, a “clandestine lodge” is “a body of Freemasons or of those improperly claiming to be Freemasons, uniting in a Lodge without the consent of a Grand Lodge, or, although originally legally constituted, continuing to work after its Charter has been revoked.”

The concerned brethren were all initiated, passed, and raised in just and regularly constituted Lodges. Most of them belong to century-old Lodges whose Charters were issued by Gran Oriente Espanol or Grand Lodge of California and subsequently re-chartered by the Grand Lodge of the Philippines. Many of them became even officers of the Grand Lodge of the Philippines or of their respective Lodges.

Even Section 2-k, Article IV, Part II-Ordinances of the GLP Constitution, which states that “the words ‘clandestine lodge’ and ‘clandestine masons’ shall refer to a fraternity, organization or association and a member thereof, which is not recognized by the Grand Lodge” presupposes that a lodge must be first declared a “clandestine lodge” before its members can be called “clandestine masons”.

The charters of their Lodges have never been revoked. Hence, their Lodges are not clandestine Lodges and the members thereof cannot be called, much less declared, clandestine masons.

2. The ground for the issuance of the subject Edicts is erroneous. – In declaring the concerned brethren as clandestine Masons under Edict No. 232, MW Yu reasoned that “under section 2, paragraph c, article XVII of the ordinances, part II of the Constitution a mason’s membership in a lodge shall be terminated by voluntary withdrawal therefrom. Considering that (they) have signified in writing their withdrawal from the Grand Lodge of the Philippines, of which Pilar Lodge is one of the subordinate lodges, (said persons) have ceased to be members of Pilar Lodge No. 15 x x x”. The subsequent edicts were issued for the same reason.

Said ground is factually and legally baseless. The brethren did not withdraw their membership from their respective Lodges. It was their Lodges, together with its members, which left the GLP and joined in the formation of a new Grand Lodge. It should be pointed out that the personality of a subordinate Lodge is separate and distinct from that of its individual members. “Once a Mason, always a Mason”, we always say. When their respective Lodges left the GLP, they became unaffiliated masons of the GLP, with right to affiliate with any of its subordinate Lodges, if they still desire to continue their membership with said Grand Lodge. So, we know of many Masons who belong to several Grand Lodges.

Even if we admit for the sake of argument that the brethren withdrew from their Lodges, they did not thereby withdraw from Masonry. The GLP Constitution allows a Master Mason to demit from his Lodge, the result of which is only loss of membership in that Lodge but not in the Fraternity.

3. It is the inherent power of Lodges to form a Grand Lodge. – The IGLPI is not and cannot correctly be declared “irregular and clandestine”. The forming of a Grand Lodge is an inherent right of a Lodge and there is no need to consult anyone on this point. All the Grand Lodges in the civilized world have been formed by independent action. (Please see minutes of the proceedings on the formation of the Grand Lodge of South Australia.) Even the GLP invoked this time-honored principle when it was organized. This is apparent from the Joint Resolution of Manila Lodge 342, Cavite Lodge No. 350 and Corregidor Lodge No. 386 dated November 17, 1912, which reads in part that “ . . . it is the inherent prerogative of any three subordinate Masonic Lodges in a territory, like the Philippines, Masonically free, to organize through their representatives, a Grand Lodge”. Furthermore, the Basic Principles of Recognition, found on page 240 of the GLP Constitution, 2005 Edition, clearly provides that a Grand Lodge has regularity of origin when it is established either by a Grand Lodge or BY AT LEAST THREE SUBORDINATE LODGES. Considering that the IGLPI was established by seven (7) subordinate Lodges, it indisputably has regularity of origin.

The Grand Master’s view that since the territorial jurisdiction of the GLP “comprises the territory of the Philippines, South Korea, the Marianas Islands, the Marshall Islands, the Ryuku Islands, South Vietnam and its existing Lodges in Japan”, no other Grand Lodge could be formed therein and any Grand Lodge so created would thus be “an irregular grand lodge and its members irregular or clandestine masons”, is ERRONEOUS. The rule on this matter is:
"There can be no question about Exclusive Jurisdiction. It is a basic principle that a Grand Lodge must be autonomous and have sole and undisputed authority over its constituent Lodges. This cannot be shared with any other Masonic council or power. But the question of exclusive territorial jurisdiction is not so clear cut. In some European and Latin American countries, a geographical or politically self-contained unit may be served by two or more Grand Lodges. If these Grand Lodges and hence their constituent Lodges are working in amity, and both are worthy of recognition in all other respects, this joint occupation of a country, state or political subdivision should not bar them from recognition.”

“In other words, the Commission on Information for Recognition has said that the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction means that all the Lodges chartered by a particular Grand Lodge give their loyalty only to that Grand Lodge, but there can be lodges chartered by different Grand Lodges in the same territory. There can be several Grand Lodges in a single geographic territory, all with many lodges under them, so long as each lodge gives its loyalty to only one Grand Lodge, and the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction is not violated, according to the 1975 statement by the Commission on Information for Recognition as reported and accepted by the Conference of Grand Masters of Masons in North America.”

(Taken from The Doctrine of Exclusive Territorial Jurisdiction, Paul M. Bessel, December 28, 1998.)

Likewise, this principle is adopted in the Philippines way back in 1932, as provided in Basic Principles on Recognition, page 240, GLP Constitution, and 2005 Edition.

4. The Grand Master cannot issue an Edict declaring Masons under his jurisdiction as clandestine masons. – There is no dispute that, in between Annual Communications of the Grand Lodge, the Grand Master may exercise all its executive and judicial powers as well as legislative power as may provide legislation that shall be harmoniously complementary to the Constitution. The act of MW Yu in declaring certain Masons as clandestine is certainly not within his executive power (i.e, to see that the laws are faithfully executed), or legislative power (i.e., to make, alter or repeal laws or prescribe general rules of government). If at all, it is in the exercise of the Grand Lodge’s judicial power to resolve controversies and to enforce discipline upon all Masons and Lodges under its jurisdiction. This judicial power however is subject to the rules on charges and trial, as provided in Part II-Ordinances, Article XVIII, of the Constitution.

Despite the vast powers of the Grand Master, he cannot suspend or expel members or worse, expunge names from the rolls of the Grand Lodge, without due process. The powers of the Grand Master under Section 2 of the GLP Constitution is predicated on “ancient general Masonic usage”, one of which is due process, i.e., the law which hears before it condemns, which proceeds upon inquiry, and renders judgment only after trial.

The concerned brethren were declared “clandestine masons” not because they were such, but to summarily expel them from the GLP without the benefit of charges and trial and due process. Edict No. 232 and its sub-Edicts may be considered bills of attainder - - a law which convicts and punishes a person without trial.

5. Edict No. 232 and its sub-Edicts are discriminatory. – On July 8, 2006, the brethren and Lodges in Eastern Visayas declared their independence from the GLP and formed the United Grand Lodge of the Philippines. The Grand Master however did not declare them “clandestine masons”, unlike what he did to the brethren of Cavite. This is contrary to the principles of justice and fairness.

6. The Grand Master has no authority to issue orders to appendant bodies. – Through Edicts 232 and its sub-Edicts, MW Yu ordered the appendant bodies to expunge the names of the concerned members from their records. This has no legal basis. The relationship between the GLP and its appendant bodies is one of comity and friendship. Each of the appendant bodies has their own rules and policies and their own set of officers. They are distinct organizations and not under the GLP. Hence, the Grand Master cannot order, but may only request these appendant bodies to adopt courses of action under the given circumstances.

In an effort to extricate himself, MW Yu issued Circular No. 17-Yu whereby he mentioned, among other things, that “when certain Philippine Lodges in Japan . . . wanted to form their own Grand Lodge, they gladly obtained the consent of our Grand Lodge and we graciously assisted them in their endeavors giving birth to the Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of Japan”. It is very sad that the Grand Master had to resort to lies. The records of the Grand Lodge of Japan reveal that the GLP strongly opposed the brethren’s move to form a new Grand Lodge. As a matter of fact, the GLP did not allow its representatives to vote in the Annual Communications although they were still then members thereof. The Grand Lodge of Japan then worked on its own and succeeded to get recognition from other foreign Grand Lodges. GLP was only the 25th Grand Lodge to recognize the Grand Lodge of Japan and subject to the condition that it would pay its past dues to the GLP and remit the GLP’s equity in the properties of the Lodges of Japan.

As one Mason wrote: “Freemasonry is not a dictatorial institution, therefore, no one has an absolute power and that includes the Grand Master. The day when a mere mortal start thinking of himself as a monarch of the Fraternity and the time when members accept that illusion – the organization they are in is no longer the Craft we knew. Only those with interior motives will allow that to happen and hoodwinked fools to continue to stay.”

Let us therefore move to have Edicts No. 232, 232-A to D disapproved during the Annual Communications in Angeles City.

References

2007-04-01T06:58:00.000+08:00

Declaration of Independence (IGLPI)
Constitutional Basis of formation
IGLPI Constitution

Creation of Grand Lodge of Japan-1957

GLP
Circular No. 4-YU
Circular No. 10-YU

Edict No. 232 & 232-A
Edict No. 232-B
Edict No. 232-C
Edict No. 232-D

Letters,
Araw Lodge No. 18 to GLP GM Yu
IGLPI to GLP GM Yu

Resolutions,
Bagong Buhay No. 17
Bagong Ilaw No. 97
Cavite Lodge No. 2
La Naval Lodge No. 269
Pilar Lodge No. 15

36. Creation of Grand Lodge of Japan-1957

2007-04-01T05:21:00.000+08:00

" Masonry in Japan The First One Hundred Years 1866 to 1966"

compiled and prepared by

MWB Nohea O.A. Peck, PGM,

Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of Japan,

by GLJ, printed in Japan,

Peter Brogren,

The Voyagers Press, Tokyo.

At the stated meeting of Moriahyama Lodge No 134 on January 16, 1957, a resolution was unanimously passed to call all the other Lodges in Japan to a Convention to consider the formation of a Grand Lodge of Japan...

Ten days later in a meeting at the Masonic Building, the DDGM with nearly all the District Grand Lodge Officers, past and present; all the Masters and Principal Officers of the 16 Lodges established in Japan were present and the gathering truly represented all the Masons of Japan directly concerned and interested in the formation of the GLJ...The consensus of opinion was very much in favor of the Resolution...

On February 16, 1957 in a first Convention with each Lodge sending a delegate of 4 duly authorized to act in behalf of the Lodge; 11 Lodges reported their unanimous endorsement of the Resolution. ..

The GLP was promptly advised of the action about to be taken, but it did not make any pronouncement nor show any reaction...

On March 16, 1957 in the second Convention 15 Lodges were unanimous in the approval of the Moriahyama Resolution...it was decided then to approach our Mother Grand Lodge and formally ask for their blessing and approval...

Meanwhile steps were taken to prepare for the adoption of a Constitution and By-Laws and the election of the future Grand Lodge Officers...

A full report of the Feb 16th Convention and Minutes were officially sent to the GLP apprising them of the situation with due regard to Masonic protocols and etiquette and out of respect to the Mother Grand Lodge...

On Feb 18, 1957, the DGM ask the DDGM to investigate the situation and details of the movement..

On Feb 21 the DDGM replied that we are loyal to the Mother Grand Lodge and intended to ask her to give us her blessing and approval as soon as we have something definite...

The DGM replied on Feb 25 that he was most happy to learn the Brethren here had no intentions of trying to organize a Grand Lodge through another jurisdiction. Unfortunately, the conditions under which the Grand Lodge of Manila would be willing to welcome the formation of the GLJ called for more time to wait until several more lodges of Japanese nationals were established;

This and some of the other points raised by the DGM could not be accepted by the Lodges, for all were impatient for their independence...

On March 16, 1957, we decided to adopt the same Constitution and By-laws of the GLP, we nominated and elected a roster of Officers who were eventually to lead the GLJ....

Together with 4 Grand Officers elect, I went to Manila and attended the Annual Communication of the GLP.

Prior to that, I personally met all the PGMs who were in Manila, but got a sympathetic response only from one of them...

in the Agenda and in the written message of GM Carlson, no mention was made of the proposed establishment of our Grand Lodge and since no other mention appeared made or about to be made, of our request, we introduced a motion in accordance with Article III...asking that the GLP extend recognition to the GLJ and assist us in fraternal communication...and that the GM. as he might consider necessary come to Japan to install the officers and consecrate the GLJ...

Our motion was considered by the GM as a petition and referred it to the Comm on Jurisprudence which quickly reported back recommending that recognition be denied...

after a debate, a motion was made and seconded to approve the recommendations of the Jurisprudence Committee denying the petition of the delegates of the De Facto Grand Lodge of Japan, and later amended to the effect that a Committee be appointed by the incoming GM to investigate the situation, it was overwhelmingly passed by the GLP...

The opinion of the Jurisprudence Comm was that we were already a De Facto Grand Lodge, in contradiction with the Credentials Comm that had admitted us as Delegates from 15 daughter Lodges and issued credentials to us which we still possess...

We were not permitted to take part in the election of the Grand Officers...

We left Manila immediately after the close of the 41st ANCOM and upon my arrival on Tokyo, I sent an official letter to MW GM Vicente Orosa asking him to sent the Committee on Investigation to Japan as soon as possible...I also informed him that the GLJ would forthwith begin exercising full rights of sovereignty and self government in Japan such as the issuance of Charters to our 15 Constituent Lodges; and to seek recognition from Grand Lodges throughout the world.

This completed our separation from our Mother Grand Lodge, in a way that was not inimical, but far from the happy and friendly one that we had envisaged when we left for Manila a few days before...

The Grand Lodge of South Carolina was the first Grand Lodge to recognize us...

Second to recognize us was the Grand Lodge of Venezuela, only days or hours after South Carolina...

MW Warren pointed out that Grand Lodge of California would like to be assured that there was to be enough number of Masons left after the US Armed Forces left Japan; that enough Japanese Brethren were raised in time so as to consider our Grand Lodge truly of Japan; and that we get recognition from Manila as soon as possible...

Grand Master Cover, Grand Lodge of Maryland just arrived from the Grand Masters Conference in Nebraska and told me the case of our Grand Lodge had been discussed; he adhered to the opinion of several GMs he met there that it waas better to wait until Manila takes action before granting recognition to Japan...

137th ANCOM Grand Lodge of Alabama Nov 19-20, 1957...

The GLP which interposed strenuous objection to the formation of this Grand Lodge claiming among other things, that the procedure followed in its formation was irregular and lacked a condition of legitimacy, and therefore would not be recognized by the mother Grand Lodge...

If the order of the GLP stands uncontested by other Grand Lodges in amity with it the results will be that of disfranchisement and denial from Masonic rights and benefits of hundreds of American citizens, both civilian and military, and ipso facto place them in the derogatory category known to regular Mason by the odious word "clandestine"...

My arrival in Manila in November 28,1957...

The points of our negotiations were duly and thoroughly discussed by us...that the GLJ wanted nothing but peace and harmony with the Mother Grande Lodge of Manila, that their friendship meant more to us than many other things, and that their recognition and acceptance as their daughter Grand Lodge was our ultimate aim, for which we were willing to go a long way in order to meet their requirements and to give them complete satisfaction compatible with our dignity and our sovereignty as a Grand Lodge...

The GM and the Investigating Comm expressed the same sentiments and assured me that they wanted to go more than half way to meet us in the road to a complete rapprochement between our two Grand Lodge...

they finally proposed that an audit be made anew this time covering up to April 25, 1957; and that Yokosuka Naval Lodge No 120, Aomori Lodge No 139, Kanto Lodge No 143, and Rising Sun Lodge UD be permitted by the GLJ to continue with their regular Masonic work unperturbed in Japan under the Philippine jurisdiction with the proviso that Kanto Lodge No 11 would change its name in order to avoid confusion...

The GLJ contend to recon the accounting by March 16 when they were considered a De Facto Grand Lodge by GLP; and will NOT change Kanto Lodge even if there are 2 Kanto Lodge in Name as there are also 2 Rising Sun Lodge, the other under the Grand Lodge of England which existed without any confusion...

By then 12 Grand Lodges had recognized the GLJ

June 10-11, 1958 ANCOM of South Dakota report of the Fraternal Correspondent on Recognition of Foreign Grand Lodges reported...that an understanding had been accomplished satisfactory to both sides, but since that time the GLP added a new controversy over its supposed equity to the Masonic Temple in Tokyo. The Commission investigated the matter and found that there is no possibility of the GLP having any claim of equity in this property...There is no reason that we should not now grant recognition to this Grand Lodge...
The formal recognition granted on July 8, 1958 by our Mother Grand Lodge of the Philippines... Philippines was No 25 among the 58 Grand Lodges which recognized the GLJ by that time...

***

29C. GLP EDICT NO. 233

2007-04-01T04:32:00.000+08:00

35A. EDICT NO. 232-D

2007-04-01T04:22:00.000+08:00

34A. ARAW LODGE NO. 18 LTR TO GM YU

2007-04-01T04:05:00.000+08:00

30A. CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS

2007-04-01T03:53:00.000+08:00

29B. EDICT NO. 232-B

2007-04-01T03:30:00.000+08:00

31A. CABLETOW

2007-04-01T02:19:00.000+08:00

29A. GLP Edict No. 232-C

2007-04-01T01:38:00.000+08:00

25A. Letter to GLP GM Yu from IGLPI

2007-04-01T01:34:00.000+08:00

21A. IGLPI Declaration of Independence

2007-04-01T00:43:00.000+08:00

22A. GLP Edict No. 232 & 232-A

2007-04-01T00:27:00.000+08:00

20C. Pilar Lodge No. 15 Resolution

2007-04-01T00:11:00.000+08:00

20B. Bagong Ilaw Lodge No. 97 RES No. 2

2007-03-31T23:57:00.000+08:00

20A. Cavite Lodge No. 2 Resolution

2007-03-31T23:46:00.000+08:00

18B. Bagong Buhay Lodge NO. 17 RES #02

2007-03-31T23:32:00.000+08:00

18A. La Naval Lodge No. 269 Resolution 03-06

2007-03-31T23:16:00.000+08:00

3a. GLP CIRCULAR No. 10-YU

2007-03-31T22:59:00.000+08:00

1a. GLP Cir No. 4 - Yu

2007-03-31T21:31:00.000+08:00

The Burning Taper: Official: New Independent Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the Philippine Islands (IGLPI) formally constituted

2007-03-29T15:19:00.000+08:00

The Burning Taper: Official: New Independent Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the Philippine Islands (IGLPI) formally constituted

Recent Events in Philippine Masonry by webmasteriglpi

The Burning Taper: Official: New Independent Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the Philippine Islands (IGLPI) formally constituted

2007-03-29T14:59:00.000+08:00

These are FREE links:

Recent Events in Philippine Masonry by webmasteriglpi

http://rapidshare.com/files/18000267/cover_square_and_compass.doc.html

http://rapidshare.com/files/18000269/TABLE_OF_CONTENTS.doc.html

http://rapidshare.com/files/18000270/WHERE_LIES_MASONRY.doc.html

http://rapidshare.com/files/18000271/z_-_all_news_bulletin___issues.doc.html

40. IGLPI Constitution

2007-03-15T10:38:00.000+08:00

Constituted 2006 AD
MOST WORSHIPFUL INDEPENDENT GRAND LODGE OF FREE AND ACCEPTED MASONS OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS

CONSTITUTION

Preamble
We the members of The Most Worshipful Independent Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the Philippine Islands, imploring the aid of the Great Architect of the Universe, in order to form a Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons in the Philippines, propagate and exemplify the tenets of Freemasonry, enhance its welfare, foster brotherhood, promote harmony, and preserve liberty, equality and fraternity, do ordain and promulgate this Constitution.

Article I

Title and Seal

Section 1. Grand Lodge Title. This Grand Lodge shall be known and referred to as the MOST WORSHIPFUL INDEPENDENT GRAND LODGE OF FREE AND ACCEPTED MASONS OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS.

Section 2. Grand Lodge Seal. The Grand Lodge Seal shall contain symbols used to exemplify Masonic teachings; the Square and Compass which is the Universal Emblem of Freemasonry; and a graphic representation of the sun and stars arranged in a triangular formation. These shall be laid out in four alternating quadrants of blue and red forming a rectangle. The red and the blue colors shall be of a hue similar to the colors of the Philippine flag. The Slogan “Kapatiran, Kalinga, Katotohanan” shall be written on a representation of three steps below the rectangle. On top of the rectangle shall be the letters I G L P I. Two graphically represented columns shall be located on the left and right sides to frame the whole composition. The words “ Constituted 2006 A.D.” shall be written below the Grand Lodge seal.

Section 3. Use of Seal. The seal shall be affixed to all instruments issued by, or under the authority of this Grand Lodge. The Grand Lodge shall regulate use of this seal other than on official instruments.

Article II
Functions, Powers, Authority and Jurisdiction

Section 1. Functions. It shall be the primary function of the Most Worshipful Independent Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the Philippine Islands (MW IGLPI) to preserve, protect, promote and propagate the tenets and ideals of Freemasonry, and to enhance the welfare of the Fraternity and the Lodges under its jurisdiction. It shall provide mechanisms to foster and preserve harmony and unity among its Lodges and their members through effective executive, legislative, and judicial measures that are fair, just and consistent with Masonic laws, General Regulations and Ancient Landmarks. Furthermore, it shall provide Masonic education programs for the development of Masonic leadership hand in hand with human potentials, in consonance with the ancient charges and obligations of the Order.

Section 2. General Powers and Authority. The MW IGLPI shall be vested with the sovereign executive, legislative, and judicial powers and authority of a government of Masons in its jurisdiction. These powers shall be limited only by strict adherence to the Ancient Landmarks of Freemasonry and to its own Constitution, By-Laws, Codes, and Ordinances, as well as the General Regulations of Freemasonry. Toward the exercise of these powers, and to ensure continuity and efficiency, the Grand Lodge shall form various instrumentalities such as but not limited to councils, boards, panels, committees, or offices.

Section 3. Executive Power. The executive power of the Grand Lodge shall include any and all powers necessary to exercise its functions, authority and prerogatives; implement the Constitution and By-Laws, Codes, Ordinances, Rules and Regulations; issue administrative circulars and provide the administrative structure and orders pertinent thereto, including but not limited to the granting of dispensations and charters to establish and perpetuate Lodges together with the power to arrest, withdraw, revoke or reactivate the same under the conditions provided for by law.

3.1 The executive power of the Grand Lodge shall be vested in the Grand Master, with the assistance of an Executive Council, composed of the Grand Master, Deputy Grand Master, Grand Wardens, Grand Treasurer, Grand Secretary, and Grand Auditor.

3.2 The Executive Council shall meet regularly or as often as maybe necessary to discuss matters for the betterment of masonry in general, and for the proper administration of the affairs of the Grand Lodge.

Section 4. Legislative Power. Legislative functions shall extend to every case of legislation, which do not inherently belong to Subordinate Lodges. This Constitution, the By-Laws and all Codes, Ordinances, Rules and Regulations, now or subsequently appended hereto together with Ancient Landmarks and General Regulations of Freemasonry shall be binding upon all Subordinate Lodges and Masons within this jurisdiction.

4.1 The legislative power of the Grand Lodge shall be vested in the Grand Assembly, which shall, among other authorities, propose and promulgate laws and approve or disapprove ordinances, edicts, and other issuances of the Grand Master, under such process as may be later adopted.

4.2. In between Grand Assemblies, legislative power shall be exercised by a Legislative Council, to be chaired by the Deputy Grand Master, which shall be composed of 10 members of Past Grand Masters and Past Masters, who shall review and recommend for approval of the Grand Master, all ordinances, edicts, and other issuances proposed by it, a Subordinate Lodge, incumbent Grand Lodge Officer, and/or groups of Masons. With the exception of the Chairman, the qualifications and tenure of other members shall be provided by law.

4.3. Ordinances, edicts, circulars, and other issuances issued by the Grand Master not approved or acted upon by the Grand Assembly next following its issuance shall immediately thereafter become without any binding force and effect

4.4 The budget of the Grand Lodge and other unusual appropriations not included in the Annual Budget shall be discussed and approved by the Legislative Council.

Section 5. Judicial Power. The judicial power of the Grand Lodge shall extend only to Masonic controversies or offenses as defined in the Constitution, By-Laws, Codes, Laws, Ordinances, General Regulations and Landmarks. The judicial power of the Grand Lodge shall be vested in Judicial Council, to be chaired by the Senior Grand Warden, composed of seven (7) members. Membership in the Judicial Council shall be appointed from among the Past Grand Masters and/or Past masters with tenures as provided by law.

5.1 The Judicial Council shall have original jurisdiction over controversies involving the Grand Lodge or its incumbent Past or Honorary Officers; all controversies among two or more Lodges, or their members, or between one of them and a member or members of a Subordinate Lodge, and the enforcement of discipline upon all Masons and Lodges under its jurisdiction. The Judicial Council shall also have original jurisdiction over all cases involving incumbent Masters of Subordinate Lodges.

5.2 The Judicial Council shall have appellate jurisdiction over decisions rendered by Subordinate Lodges; provided that decisions of expulsions or suspensions of members of Subordinate Lodges shall be implemented even during the pendency of the appeal, after notice had been sent to the Grand Secretary and the brother so suspended or expelled. Decisions of the Subordinate Lodges imposing expulsion or suspension of one year or more, shall be automatically reviewed by the Judicial Council.

5.3 Actions or decisions of the Judicial Council shall be immediately executory and may be set-aside only by the Grand Assembly.

5.4 The Judicial Council shall, within 90 days from the ratification of this Constitution, draft the pertinent rules and regulations on Charges and Trial.

Section 6. The Council of Elders. The Council of Elders shall act as an advisory body to the Grand Master and to the Grand Lodge. It shall be composed of seven (7) members, with the Chairman, and two vice-chairmen all Past Grand Masters, serving a tenure of three years, provided that the first appointee acting as chairman shall serve for one year, the second for two and the third for three. Law shall provide the qualifications and tenure of other members. The Council of Elders shall be given oversight functions over all the Councils of the Grand Lodge.

Section 7. Jurisdiction. The Grand Lodge shall exercise jurisdiction over all Subordinate Lodges within the territorial jurisdiction of the Republic of the Philippines, affiliated with it and/or chartered under this Constitution.

7.1 Districts or Regions may be formed for efficient and effective administration of Lodges in consonance with the functions and authority of the Grand Lodge. Criteria for such formation shall include the number of Lodges and size of membership, span of control for efficient management, and ability to sustain a turn over of qualified officers. Lodges may petition the Grand Lodge to form a district; districts may petition to form a region, subject to the provisions of the manual or code for Grand Lodge Administration.

Article III
Members, Officers and Titles of Officers

Section 1. Members. The Grand Lodge shall be composed of the Subordinate Lodges and their members in good standing, represented by their incumbent Masters and Wardens. Master Masons of any Subordinate Lodge of this Grand Lodge present and duly registered at any Assembly shall be entitled to speak and vote on any issue raised and discussed therein.

Section 2. Elected Grand Officers and Titles
a. The Grand Master (MW) Most Worshipful. b. The Deputy Grand Master (RW) Right Worshipful
c. The Senior Grand Warden (RW) Right Worshipful .
d. The Junior Grand Warden (RW) Right Worshipful .
e. The Grand Treasurer (RW) Right Worshipful f. The Grand Secretary (RW) Right Worshipful
g. The Grand Auditor (RW) Right Worshipful

Section 3. Appointive Grand Officers and Titles
a. The Assistant Grand Secretary (VW) Very Worshipful
b. The Grand Inspector General (VW) Very Worshipful
c. The Grand Lecturer (VW) Very Worshipful
d. The Grand Legal Officer (VW) Very Worshipful
e. The Grand Chaplain (VW) Very Worshipful
f. The Grand Orator (VW) Very Worshipful
g. The Grand Marshal (VW) Very Worshipful
h. The Senior Grand Deacon (VW) Very Worshipful
i. The Junior Grand Deacon (VW) Very Worshipful
j. The Grand Standard Bearer (VW) Very Worshipful
k. The Grand Sword Bearer (VW) Very Worshipful
l. The Grand Bible Bearer (VW) Very Worshipful
m. The Senior Grand Steward (VW) Very Worshipful
n. The Junior Grand Steward (VW) Very Worshipful
o. The Grand Organist (VW) Very Worshipful
p. The Grand Tyler (VW) Very Worshipful

Section 4. Other Appointive Grand Line Officers
a. Regional Grand Deputy(ies) (VW) Very Worshipful
b. Regional Grand Inspector(s) (VW) Very Worshipful
c. Regional Grand Lecturer(s) (VW) Very Worshipful
d. District Grand Supervisor(s) (VW) Very Worshipful
e. District Grand Inspector(s) (VW) Very Worshipful
f. District Grand Lecturer(s) (VW) Very Worshipful

Section 5. Qualifications of Elective and Appointive Officers. Qualifications of the various elective and appointive officers shall be embodied in a Grand Lodge Election and Appointments Code.
5.1 No one shall be appointed officer of the Grand Lodge unless he is a member in good standing of a Subordinate Lodge in this jurisdiction. If he is a dual/plural member of another Subordinate Lodge, he shall also automatically cease to be an officer of the Grand Lodge should he lose his status as member in good standing in any of his dual/plural Subordinate Lodge.

ARTICLE IV
Powers and Duties of Elective Grand Officers

Section 1. The Grand Master. He shall be the Chief Executive Officer of the Grand Lodge.
1.1 The Grand Master shall be responsible and accountable to the Craft for the proper governance thereof, for the maintenance of harmony and order within the Fraternity, the preservation of its principal tenets and teachings, and to ensure strict adherence to the Ancient Landmarks, the Uniform Code of By-Laws, Ordinances, Edicts and Rules and Regulation of the Grand Lodge, by all Subordinate Lodges and its members.

1.2. The powers, duties and responsibilities as well as accountability of the Grand Master shall be embodied in a manual or code specifically formulated for Grand Lodge administration and management.

Section 2. The Deputy Grand Master. It shall be the duty of the Deputy Grand Master to assist the Grand Master in the performance of any and all his official functions and duties and to perform his official functions and duties in the event of the latter’s death, his absence from this jurisdiction, or his inability to perform his official functions and duties. He shall perform other duties that may be assigned to him by the Grand Master.

2.1 The Deputy Grand Master shall be the Chairman of the Legislative Council, which has the power to review the recommendations of the Committees on Revision of the Constitution, Edicts and By-Laws, and Legislations for the orderly and proper guidance of all Masons and Lodges within the Grand Jurisdiction. Any law, edicts, etc. approved by this Legislative Council shall be submitted to the Grand Master for approval and implementation while the Grand Lodge is in recess, and for confirmation at the next Annual Grand Assembly.

2.2 The powers, duties and responsibilities as well as accountability of the Deputy Grand Master shall be embodied in a manual or code specifically formulated for Grand Lodge administration and management.

Section 3. The Grand Wardens. It shall be the duty of the Grand Wardens to assist the Grand Master at all times and, in the absence of the Grand Master and of the Deputy Grand Master, to preside at Assemblies of the Grand Lodge in the order of their rank.

3.1 In the event of death, absence from this jurisdiction, or inability of both the Grand Master and Deputy Grand Master, they shall, in the order of their rank, be vested with all the powers in consonance with the duties assumed.

3.2 The Senior Grand Warden shall be the Chairman of the Judicial Council, which shall exercise such powers as mandated in Article II, Section 5 hereof.

3.3 The Junior Grand Warden shall be the overseer of social functions, protocol, public relations and preparation/conduct of all Grand Assemblies, under the direct supervision of the Grand Master.

3.4 The powers, duties and responsibilities as well as accountability of the Grand Wardens shall be embodied in a manual or code specifically formulated for Grand Lodge administration and management.

Section 4. The Grand Treasurer. He shall be responsible and accountable for the proper management, administration, control, and safeguarding of all the funds, properties and resources of the Grand Lodge.

4.1 The powers, duties and responsibilities as well as accountability of the Grand Treasurer shall be embodied in a manual or code specifically formulated for Grand Lodge administration and management.

Section 5. The Grand Secretary. He shall be responsible and accountable for the preparation, receipt and safekeeping of all records, documents and other papers or media. He shall also be authorized to collect all monies due to the Grand Lodge, make an accurate account thereof, and turn-over the same to the Grand Treasurer in accordance with established procedures and regulations.

5.1 The powers, duties and responsibilities as well as accountability of the Grand Secretary shall be embodied in a manual or code specifically formulated for Grand Lodge administration and management.

Section 6. The Grand Auditor. He shall perform internal audit and see to it that funds and properties of the Lodge are properly accounted for and properly safeguarded in accordance with the rules and regulations of audit prescribed by the Grand Lodge and in conformity with existing laws of the land.

6.1 The powers, duties and responsibilities as well as accountability of the Grand Auditor shall be embodied in a manual or code specifically formulated for Grand Lodge administration and management.

ARTICLE V
Powers and Duties of Appointive Grand Lodge Officers
Section 1. Assistant Grand Secretary. He shall be vested with such powers and duties as may be delegated to him by the Grand Secretary, with the approval of the Grand Master.

Section 2. Grand Inspector General. He shall assist the Grand Master in monitoring compliance to Grand Lodge policies, rules and regulations relative to administration of lodges as provided by law. He shall also assist in monitoring the labor of the Lodges in accordance with approved rituals and ceremonies.

Section 3. Grand Lecturer. He shall be the principal adviser of the Grand Master and the officers on matters pertaining to Masonic ceremonies, rituals and protocol, on the proper interpretation of the ancient landmarks, traditions, history, philosophy, and such other Masonic doctrines. He shall give a lecture on such subjects during the assemblies of the Grand Lodge or of any of its regions, districts and lodges in its jurisdiction as the Grand Master may require

Section 4 Grand Legal Officer. He shall handle all legal matters involving the Grand Lodge and represent it in all litigations and cases whether administrative, judicial or quasi-judicial in nature.

Section 5 Grand Chaplain. It shall be his duty of the Grand Chaplain to promote the spiritual fitness of the members of the Craft and to perform, during each Annual Grand Assembly and on other appropriate occasions, such services appertaining to his office as may be required of him by the Grand Master.

Section 6. Grand Orator. It shall be his duty of the Grand Orator to deliver an oration to the Grand Lodge at its Annual Grand Assembly or on other occasions as the Grand Master may direct.

Section 7. Grand Marshal. It shall be his duty to:
7.1 Proclaim the Grand Officers at their installation and to make such other proclamation as the Grand Master may direct.

7.2 Introduce and conduct the representatives of other Grand Lodges and all visiting brethren of distinction in all assemblies of the Grand Lodge.

7.3 Take charge of all processions of the Grand Lodge, and perform such other duties proper to his office under the direction of the Grand Master.

Section 8. Grand Deacons. It shall be their duty to assist the Grand Master and Grand Wardens in the manner prescribed by the ancient usages of the Craft.

Section 9. Grand Standard Bearer. It shall be his duty to carry the Banner of the Grand Lodge in all processions and at all public ceremonies.

Section 10. Grand Sword Bearer. It shall be his duty to attend to the Grand Master and carry the Sword of the Grand Lodge in all processions and at all public ceremonies.

Section 11. Grand Bible Bearer. It shall be his duty to carry the Book of Holy Writings in all processions and at all public ceremonies.

Section 12. Grand Stewards. It shall be their duty to superintend the preparations for all festive occasions directed by the Grand Lodge.

Section 13. Grand Organist. It shall be his duty to preside at the organ at the opening and the closing and other ceremonies of the Grand Lodge as appropriate.

Section 14. Grand Tyler. It shall be his duty to:
14.1 Guard the outer door of the Grand Lodge when convened.

14.2 Report all applicants for admission to the Junior Grand Deacon and see that all who enter are duly authorized and properly clothed.

14.3 Make suitable preparations for the accommodation of the Grand Lodge at all its Assemblies and see that its hall is kept in proper condition during their continuance.

14.4 Take charge of and safely keep the jewels, furniture, clothing, and other paraphernalia of the Grand Lodge during its Assemblies and other ceremonies.

14.5 Serve all notices and summonses, and perform such other duties as maybe required of him by the Grand Lodge or the Grand Master.

Section 15. Accountability. The powers, duties and responsibilities as well as accountabilities of these officers shall be embodied in a manual or code specifically formulated for Grand Lodge administration and management.

Article VI
Powers and Duties of Regional and District Grand Officers
Section 1. Regional Grand Deputies. They shall assist the Grand Master on matters pertaining to the administration of Masonic regions that may be established by the Grand Lodge.

Section 2. District Grand Supervisors.. They shall be the extensions of the Regional Grand Deputies for their respective districts. Where the office of Regional Grand Deputy has not yet been established, a District Grand Supervisor shall directly assist the Grand Master on matters pertaining to the administration of the District that may be established and assigned to him by the Grand Lodge

Section 3 Regional and District Grand Inspectors. They shall be the extensions of the Grand Inspector General in their respective Masonic regions or districts.

Section 4 Regional and District Grand Lecturers. They shall be the extensions of the Grand Lecturer in their respective Masonic regions and districts.

Section 5. Accountability. The powers, duties and responsibilities as well as accountabilities of these officers shall be embodied in a manual or code specifically formulated for Grand Lodge administration and management.

Article VII
General Assemblies, Meetings and Quorum
Section 1. Annual Grand Assembly. The Grand Lodge shall hold an Annual Grand Assembly at a place and time as may be authorized by law for the transaction of business, for a period of three (3) calendar days commencing on or about the last Thursday of November. No business shall be taken up at the Annual Grand Assembly unless it has been previously referred to and acted upon by the proper committee, except when such business is demanded by at least two-thirds (2/3) of the Subordinate Lodges present.

Section 2. Special Grand Assembly. Special Grand Assemblies may be called by the Grand Master whenever such shall promote the general welfare of the Fraternity or upon a Resolution of at least one-third (1/3) of the Subordinate Lodges setting forth the causes for such demand. The purpose(s) for calling the Special Grand Assemblies shall be clearly specified in the notices to the Subordinate Lodges and no other topic shall be entertained during the proceedings.

Section 3. Meetings of Grand Lodge Instrumentalities. Regular and special meetings of any of the instrumentalities formed by the Grand Lodge for the purpose of governance and in consonance with its functions, power and authority may be called as provided for by law

Section 4. Quorum. The presence of at least one-third (1/3) of the chartered Lodges represented by their Masters and / or Wardens shall constitute a quorum for the Grand Lodge to transact business validly whether at an Annual Grand or Special Assembly. On ceremonial occasions, however, the Grand Master or his duly authorized representative, with a sufficient number of Masons present to fill the Grand stations and places, may, at any time, open the Grand Lodge and perform the ceremonies for which it has been convened. No member of the Grand Lodge, Master, or Warden of Subordinate Lodges may be represented by proxy in any Grand or Special Assembly of the Grand Lodge.

Article VIII
Election and Appointment
Section 1. General Provisions. Elections of elective officers of the Grand Lodge and all its Subordinate Lodges shall be conducted in consonance with the “injunction or rather emulation of who best can work and best agree”. The Grand Lodge shall ensure that it is conducted with the highest standards of integrity, harmony and efficiency, devoid of politicking, electioneering, influence peddling and extravagance. To this end, the Grand Lodge shall provide necessary administrative instruments, and legislative measures that shall include sanctions against violations and similar improper acts.

Section 2. Schedule of Grand Election. The Grand Lodge shall hold its annual election on the second day of its Annual Grand Assembly.

Section 3. Elective Officers and Manner of Election. The elective Grand Lodge Officers namely, the Grand Master, the Deputy Grand Master, the Senior and the Junior Grand Wardens, the Grand Treasurer, the Grand Secretary and the Grand Auditor shall be elected through secret balloting by majority vote of incumbent elected officers of the Subordinate Lodges, Immediate Past Masters, elected Grand Lodge Officers, Regional Grand Deputies, and District Grand Supervisors present and duly registered in the Annual Grand Assembly

Section 4. Installation of Officers. The elected Grand Officers, and those appointed by the Grand Master-elect, shall be installed before the conclusion of the Annual Grand Assembly.
Section 5. Terms of Office and Vacancies. The term of office of elected and appointed Grand Officers shall be for one (1) year. They shall hold office until their successors have been elected or appointed and installed unless their terms are shortened due to justifiable reasons. The following rule on succession shall be observed for any vacancy that may occur, in any of the elective or appointive positions:

5.1 In the event of vacancy occurring in the positions of Grand Master, Deputy Grand Master and Senior Grand Warden, the next in line shall serve the unexpired term without prejudice to his nomination to the same position in the succeeding election.

5.2 In the event of a vacancy occurring for the position of Junior Grand Warden, the Grand Master shall appoint a replacement Pro-Tempore from the Council of Elders who shall serve the unexpired term in a concurrent capacity. The Junior Grand Warden Pro-Tempore shall not
be included in the line of succession and shall not be eligible for nomination to any elective position in the Grand Lodge in the succeeding election.

5.3 For elective positions other than the Deputy Grand Master and the Grand Wardens, any vacancy shall be filled by the Grand Master upon consultation with the Council of Elders to serve the unexpired term without prejudice to his nomination to the same office in the succeeding annual election

5.4 For vacancies occurring in any appointive Grand Officer positions, the Grand Master shall appoint a replacement who shall serve the unexpired term.

Section 6. Qualifications and Eligibility of Elective and Appointive Grand Officers. The qualifications and eligibility of elective and appointive officers as provided under the Election and Appointments Code, shall be strictly adhered to.

Section 7. The Election Board and Election Related Bodies. The Grand Lodge shall organize an Election Board and other election related bodies for the purpose of preparing, conducting and safeguarding its electoral process.

7.1 The Election Board shall have a chairman and two members, serving a fixed tenure not exceeding three years (3) provided that the first appointee shall serve for one (1) year, the second for two (2) years and last appointee for three (3) years. The Election Board shall determine eligibility and qualification of all recommendees for nomination to the position of Junior Grand Warden; to prepare and administer election laws; and, to perform any function relative thereto as may be provided by law. It shall be authorized to create a Panel of Peers, Electoral Tribunal and Committees, whether permanent or ad-hoc, to assist them in their functions.

7.2 The Election Board shall create a Panel of Peers which shall be an Ad Hoc body of non-voting Past Masters from accredited Subordinate Lodges created in situ by drawing lots during the election proper and tasked with the evaluation of recommendees to the position of Junior Grand Warden passed by the Election Board. Its recommendations shall be submitted to the Council of Elders, through the Election Board, for final evaluation.

7.3 The Election Board shall create an ad-hoc Electoral Tribunal, composed of five (5) incumbent or past Grand Officers, which shall investigate, hear, and decide all formal election-related charges. Its decision shall be final and immediately executory, without prejudice to the filing of appropriate charges with the Judicial Council for unmasonic conduct and/or violation of the Constitution, statutes, by-laws, and other pertinent laws and regulations.

Section 8. Nominations for Elective Positions. The elected and installed Deputy Grand Master, the Senior and Junior Grand Wardens shall be considered nominated for the next higher position unless they become ineligible. The incumbent Grand Treasurer, Grand Auditor and the Grand Secretary shall be automatically nominated for the same positions, subject to confirmation by the Council of Elders, without prejudice to their consideration of other nominees

Section 9. Nominations for the Election of the Junior Grand Warden. For the purpose of selecting nominees for the election of the Junior Grand Warden, there shall be stages and processes for recommendation, preliminary-qualification, peer evaluation and nomination. Recommendations for nomination of Junior Grand Warden shall be at the initiative of Lodges under this jurisdiction, subject to preliminary screening and selection of the region, district or other grouping where these Lodges may belong, before submission to the Election Board.

Section 10. Final Nomination for Junior Grand Warden. Final nomination for the position of Junior Grand Warden shall be made by the Council of Elders.

Section 11. Election and Appointments Code. The Grand Lodge shall formulate an Election and Appointments Code

Section 12. Voting and Lodge Representation. Voting, qualification of voters, Lodge accreditation and representation shall be governed by the Election and Appointments Code.

Article IX
Revenues
Section 1. The revenue of the Grand Lodge shall be derived from fees, membership dues, special lodge and membership assessments, donations, contributions, proceeds from publications, sales of supplies, fund raising, and from other sources as may be authorized by law.

Article X
Legislation
Section 1. The Grand Lodge shall provide the means for a continuing study and promulgation of legislative measures for all matters requiring legislation, with strict adherence to the tenets and teachings of the Fraternity and in conformity with this Constitution and existing laws of the land.

Article XI
Masonic Education
Section 1. Objectives. The creation of a strong foundation for membership shall be a prime objective of the Grand Lodge. To this end, there shall be a continuing in depth study and promotion of the philosophy and teachings of Freemasonry, coupled with the assimilation of historical documents, artifacts and Masonic literature for the appreciation of future generation of Masons. There shall be a strong effort to inspire and encourage members to undertake research, teach, write or make dissertations that would serve to add and enhance the enlightenment of the brethren in particular and the community in general.

Section 2. Creation of an Institution for Masonic Education. The Grand Lodge shall create an institutional body to plan, lead, direct and supervise Masonic education and leadership training programs for the benefit of Lodges and their members in its jurisdiction and Masonry in general.

Section 3. Programs. There shall be a continuing effort to upgrade the quality of membership through short, medium and long-range programs that shall eventually make passing through or graduation from various courses, modules, seminars or workshops mandatory for all officers of the Grand Lodge as well as the Lodges in its jurisdiction.

Article XII
Amendments
Section 1. The Constitution may be amended only during the Annual Grand Assembly by a three-fourths (3/4) vote of the members present A proposed amendment receiving a majority but less than three-fourths (3/4) votes shall be laid over the year, published in the proceedings as a “Proposed Amendment to the Constitution” and can again be proposed at the next Annual Grand Assembly.

Article XIII
Transitory Provisions on Accreditation
Section 1. Strict Adherence to the Universal Tenets of Freemasonry. It is with a strong conviction to uphold the universal tenets of Freemasonry, its principles and Ancient Landmarks that the Most Worshipful Independent Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the Philippine Islands is formed. It shall be incumbent upon its adherents to exercise utmost care in evaluating petitions of non-constituent lodges for accreditation.

Section 2. Constituent Lodges. Constituent Lodges that are signatories to the Declaration of Independence and those that shall have finalized and submitted their respective resolutions to join the Grand Lodge before or during the first General Assembly on November 25, 2006 shall be considered charter members

Section 3. Committee on Accreditation. A Committee on Accreditation shall be created to receive and evaluate petition of non-constituent Lodges for accreditation. Its first responsibility shall be to establish well-defined parameters to be used in the process of evaluation giving critical emphasis on moral standards in determining the worthiness of individual master masons included in the roster of members of a Lodge petitioning for accreditation

Section 4. Accreditation of Non-Constituent Lodges. After the first Grand Assembly of 2006, non-constituent Lodges in good standing may seek membership by submitting to the Committee on Accreditation their petitions for accreditation and comply with other procedural requirements as may be specified, provided that Lodges that were active as original proponents of the Most Worshipful Independent Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the Philippine Islands may still be considered as charter members until May 2007.

Section 5. Affiliation. Individual Master Masons in good standing may affiliate with accredited Subordinate Lodges in accordance with the affiliation requirements set by the Committee on Accreditation.

ARTICLE XIV
Transitory Provisions for Election and Appointment
Section 1. Interim Grand Officers. An interim set of Grand Lodge officers shall initially administer the affairs of and govern the Grand Lodge. They shall be given all the powers necessary to lay down the foundation for and/or prepare the Grand Lodge toward the enforcement of the structural, legislative, executive, judicial and administrative mandates and all other provisions of this Constitution.

Section 2. Term of Office. The elected and appointed interim officers of the Grand Lodge shall hold office until their successors shall have been elected or appointed, and installed during the Second Annual Grand Assembly in November 2007.

Section 3. Officers of Subordinate Lodges. Incumbent elected and appointed officers of accredited Subordinate Lodges as well as those who shall petition for accreditation and may be approved under Article XIII Sections 4, shall hold office until their successors are elected or appointed in December 2006 and subsequently installed.

Section 4. Installation and Term of Office of Officers of Subordinate Lodges. The officers of the Subordinate Lodges elected or appointed in December 2006 and subsequently installed until February 28, 2007. They shall hold office until their successors shall have been elected or appointed in September 2007, and subsequently installed not later than October 31, 2007, which shall be the regular election and installation period of this Grand Lodge.

Section 5. Positions Requiring Past Grand Master Eligibility. Specific requirements for the appointment of Past Grand Master for any of the Council, Committee or other instrumentalities should not take effect until sufficient number of Past Grand Masters shall have been met.

ARTICLE XV
Transitory Provisions for Recognition of Masonic Services
Section 1 Accreditation of Masonic Services in Other Grand Jurisdiction. Masonic services of members of accredited Lodges served in other jurisdictions shall be recognized, provided they are members of good standing as attested by their respective lodges.

Section 2. Recognition of Life Members by Longevity. Members considered Life Members by Longevity shall be recognized, provided they can show proof of their claim or as may be attested by their respective lodges.

Section 3. Creation of Legal Assistance Committee. A Legal Assistance Committee shall be created to advise and assist members on questions of Masonic benefits that may be due or demandable by virtue of their past membership in other jurisdictions.

ARTICLE XVI
Effectivity
Section 1. Effectivity. This Constitution shall be effective immediately upon its ratification at the First Grand Assembly on November 25, 2006.

Section 2 Repeal Clause. All laws, rules and regulations, administrative procedures, organizational models, titles, circulars, and other provisions adopted during the interim period not consistent with this Constitution shall be deemed repealed and/or superseded.

RATIFIED THIS 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2006, DURING THE I.G.L.P.I. FIRST ANNUAL GRAND ASSEMBLY HELD AT EMILIO AGUINALDO MEMORIAL LODGE NO 5, WAKAS, KAWIT, CAVITE. PHILIPPINES.

39. GM Message Jan 23, 2007

2007-03-15T10:24:00.000+08:00

JANUARY 23, 2007 EMAIL

Dear Brothers in Freemasonry,

Fraternal Greetings to all.

Attached herewith is the IGLPI Constitution which was ratified during the First Grand Assembly on November 25, 2006, at Emilio Aguinaldo Memorial Lodge No 4.
For your appreciation of the hopes and aspirations of the Brethren's ideals of what and how a Grand Lodge should govern.

You will find a great difference. It manifest a close link between doctrines and rules; between freedom/democracy and dictatorship; between the ancient and the present traditions and culture.

Thank you for your time and patience.

Please pass it to those brothers inrterested to know.

Fraternally,

Bro Jim Bantolo

38. Clandestine Masons?

2007-03-15T10:21:00.000+08:00

JANUARY 6, 2007 EMAIL

Clandestine or regular, what is the difference? Somewhat interesting is the silent response to the accolades bestowed to deeds committed by Freemasons whether "regular" or "clandestine. " It seems like that we Freemasons do not feel obligated to inform the general public of the difference. When the occasion for laurel wreath of victory to rest upon the head, or hang jewels to fit the diadem, we seems to forget the affiliation of a famous black brother from Prince Hall Lodge or the Grand Orient Lodge membership of a brother revolutionary General.

Case in point is the fact that Freemasons under the jurisdiction of Gran Oriente Espana initiated the Philippine Revolution. The "Masonically inspired and lead evolution," Bro. Emilio Aguinaldo was referring to was not due to the Freemasons under the jurisdiction of various "regular" Grand Lodges from United States. Grand Orient Lodges were already established in the Philippines before the creation of the Grand Lodge of the Philippines, which calls Grand Lodge of California as its Mother Grand Lodge. Under the pretext of being" different" these proud (rightly so) Lodges were declared "clandestine. " All "regular" Masons are prohibited to engage in any Masonic communications with "irregular" Masons. For new comers who decided that their "brand" of Freemasonry is "regular" and declaring those who would not submit to their claimed jurisdiction are "clandestine" is an example of how "benevolent dictatorship" breeds into the mind of self-righteous and accepted by those hoodwinked by rheotorics of charlatans.

The notion of Brotherhood of Man under the Fatherhood of God is somehow became a rhetorical quest for definition of "standard" Freemasonry. How one can explain the idea of Brotherly Love if labeling clandestine meant ignoring those who don't "looked" like us? Does "brotherhood" applies only to "us" and exclude the rest of the humanity? What makes "regular" better than the rest of the world? Pretty presumptuous thinking I must say.

F/
Rudy Olano
Lincoln Lodge No. 34
Hanford Lodge No. 279
6Jan07

37. From the Inside of PB#51

2007-03-15T10:13:00.000+08:00

JANUARY 6, 2007 EMAIL…king_solomon636@yahoo.com WROTE:

Fraternal greetings brethren,

Pleasant day my brothers, Several articles coming from different sides had been written about the issues regarding the expulsion of the elected lights and officers of Pintong Bato Lodge No.51... But I think nobody had ever written it FROM THE INSIDE just yet.

And so I now come forward to share what i know. And to be heard. I believe that not only the WM and his allies has the monopoly of the truth.I am a member of Pintong Bato Lodge No.51 and i would like to shed light on the issue and tell the account on what had really happened from the inside. From the beginning of the turmoil that had engulped our lodge many of its members tried as much as they can to be prudent and neural on the issues so as not to add fuel to the already raging fire. Hoping for a truly masonic and civilized means of resolving the disharmony and disunity within. (We had a rough year 2006, beset with issues of expelled members, internal squabbles, factions and personnal differences... all of which I thought should not be happening in our faternity specially in a masonic lodge...Harmony being the strenght and support of all societies specially of ours.)But i guess the cabletow of our Patience is running short, Prudence has its endings too, with had happened to our lodge.

As we are all familiar with, December is the month of election of the officers in the blue lodges for the ensuing masonic year. And so we had ours. December 9, 2006, we had convened for the monthly stated meeting. As i remembered, 50 members came for the special purpose of electing the officers for the ensuing Masonic Year 2007. We started our meeting with the usual agendas, but since lots of topics were being tackled,some members loosing patience, because its getting late a brother suggested to move to more important agenda of the day. The election. Before election though, the Master started citing again so many issues regarding election. I think delaying the process intentionally. After a long deliberation, we finally proceeded. The election went well, new officers were elected. We were contented with the results, and was positive about the outcome. Hoping the dream of having our lodge harmonized and united may just be possible.The newly elected WM was WB Lamberto Binuncal. We though we will have no problem with him as the master because he was already a Past Master of a lodge in the States and a very proficient brother mason. SW WB J Murillo PM, JW Bro Almeda.

And so we thought...December 17, 2006. Lodge's Christmas party. Brethren came. WB Binuncal was also there along with the other brethren in one table. After the fellowship, he left. Later, one by one went home. No idea of what would happen next... When only few members were left, the incumbent WM and his allies opened the topic regarding the result of the election. Apparently they were not happy about the election result and are determined not to let the newly duly elected officers be installed. Some of us were in awe... Shocked of what we were hearing in front of us. I myself can't believed what I was hearing, they are plotting a plan against the elected officers? But why? Some of us insisted that the election result be respected, after all it was the will of the majority. But to no avail. In dismay and confusion, a brother left. We soon followed...

The next morning they went to the GLP. December 30, 2006. Every newly elected lights has to come to Trece Martirez Lodge to take their proficiency exam. What happened next was a shock to them. The DDGM approached them and showed the edict from the GLP. Edict 232-C... Xpelling more and more of the brethren. 5 members from our lodge including the elected WM and SW were included in the list, along with the other elected officers. All were Past Masters (joining the status of previously expelled brethren who were also Past Masters, and held high positions in the district before). They were placed in a very embarrassing situation, in front of all the other brethren who were there, some of whom were caught grinning...How insulting, how unmasonic. Immediately realizing that they have no business being there, they left with a heavy heart.

How can a brother to that? Whatever their motivation was, I wonder where the heck did brotherly love, relief, and truth went? As well as temperence, prudence, fortitude and justice? All seemed lost. I wonder, If the Master cannot protect his members and his lodge, but rather persecute them, what is he doing there sitting on the oriental chair for?Some of us who were disgusted and dismayed of what our supposed Master and his allies had done to the other members were bold enough to join the expelled brethren in transferring to IGLPI. Some of us too are thinking of doing the same. Again, our caletow of patience is running short.

We love this fraternity. There is no other like it in the whole world. But if we let it be destroyed by hoodlums in apron, Its unforgivevable. I believe that is it our indespensable obligation to our Fraternity to keep our ranks checked from those who are eroding our institution. That is why i cannot keep my silence no more. I have high regards to those of our members who were expelled from the GLP and are now members of the IGLPI, for they are the foundations of our 88 year old lodge. They have spend their whole life in the service of the craft and were just expelled without justice.

To our Incumbent WMaster E.P. Please do remember that you too owe a lot to them to get where you are right now, and so as all the other members of this lodge. I guess no one can dispute the things ive said because it really happened. I salute the other members who joined the IGLPI, i will continue be sharing my ideals with you all and will consider you as true brothers still.More power to our Fraternity and may the GAOTU bless us all.

36. Pintong Bato Lodge 51 join IGLPI

2007-03-15T10:10:00.000+08:00

JANUARY 6,2007 EMAIL

MORE CONFUSION IN GLP TEMPLE WITH NEW EDICT 232C
FINALLY FORCED PINTONG BATO LODGE 51 TO JOIN THE IGLPI

Yesterday Pintong Bato Lodge No 51 of the Grand Lodge of the Philippines, an 88 year old Lodge based at Bacoor, Cavite, Philippines, formally affiliated with the IGLPI and was recharted with a new charter and renumbered Lodge No 9. What were the compelling reasons why this very old lodge eventually ceased its loyalty and subordination from the GLP and decided to join the new Grand Lodge? WHY indeed ?

A few months ago, four (4) stalwarts of Pintong Bato Lodge , a PDDGM, 2 PDLs, a young Master Mason and three(3) of which are LMLs, were declared by GM YU of the GLP as “clandestine Masons by sight” for being seen attending the public event of the constitution of the IGLPI at Kawit, Cavite, Philippines last September 10, 2006. With this INJUSTICE , there being NO charges filed, No trial Coimmission, NO due process, these MM filed a case against GM YU and 3 others at the Regional Trial Court of Bacoor, Cavite as there is NO other venue of redress at the GLP with the GM decision as NON-appealable. The Court finally ruled against the INJUNCTION as it sustained the vast powers of the GLP GM which can ONLY BE NULLIFIED by the Grand Lodge at ANCOM and since the case is MOOT and ACADEMIC as the Edict 232B had been read in other Lodges.

Last November 30, 2006, GLP GM YU issued a Letter Directive to IGLPI Lodges – Cavite Lodge (2), Bagong Buhay Lodge (17), E. Aguinaldo Lodge (31), Bagong Ilaw Lodge (97), La Naval Lodge No (269), Mendez Nunez Lodge No (316); and to the GLP Lodges – Pintong Bato Lodge 51, Magdiwang Lodge 238, and St Augustine Lodge 300; which I quote:

“ Greetings…. In view of the fact that the Charter of your respective Lodges have been MISSING (my emphasis), you are hereby granted a dispensation to hold your Stated Meetings for the transaction of business and election, until the charter of your Lodges are recovered or a re-constituted charter can be issued….
Fraternally yours… (signed) ROMEO A YU… Grand Master…
Attest… DANILO D ANGELES PGM… Grand Secretary…”

Since September 10, 2006, the above named six (6) Lodges were among the seven (7) Lodges which AFFILIATED and JOINED the IGLPI together with ALL their members, their temples, their records, their properties, their funds with them. Their CHARTER ARE NOT LOST as they are in the ARCHIEVE of the Lodges. GLP GM YU has NO AUTHORITY directing these so called “PHANTOM LODGES”. NO Lodge could meet WITHOUT A CHARTER. Even so, NO CHARTER could be issued or re-issed as there is NO LODGE to be given one.

The three (3) other GLP Lodges HAVE NOT LOST their CHARTERS as of November 30, 2006. Any confusion? Why the issuance of the letters?

Last December 9, 2006, Pintong Bato Lodge of the GLP had their Monthly Stated Meeting and Elections. A new complete set of officers were elected. There was tumult from the losing side and a threat was made that these new officers will never sit in the lodge!!!

Last December 9, 2006 , Indang Lodge of the GLP had their Monthly Stated Meeting and election. On that faithful day, the outgoing Master ask the DDGM VW Marasigan for a Dispensation to schedule the Meeting and election earlier at 9 in the morning instead of 2 in the afternoon. This change was NOT KNOWN to ALL the active members nor was this APPROVED by the members earlier. So only 16 members attended and when the rest of the Lodge members arrived in the afternoon the Election was a done deal.

Last December 22, 2006, St Augustine Lodge of the GLP had their Monthly Stated Meeting and Election. The earlier declared “clandestine Masons” incumbent Master and other Officers were NOT allowed to enter the Lodge.

Last December 21, 2006, GLP GM YU issued Edict No 232C declaring another 37 Master Masons of several Lodges in Cavite as “ clandestine Masons” citing the reports of DDGM VW Mario Marasigan that these Master Masons CONTINUE to attend the affairs of IGLPI and Lodges affiliated with IGLPI. Among those EXPELLED were MEMBERS of LODGES AFFILIATED WITH IGLPI since September 10, 2006 over which GM YU has NO AUTHORITY.

What is MYSTERIOUS was the FALSE CHARGE of DDGM Marasigan that the NEWLY ELECTED OFFICERS of Pintong Bato Lodge No 51 of the GLP, were among those attending the affairs of the IGLPI. And so hence were also EXPELLED by GM YU. I say to you that those elected officers of the Pintong Bato Lodge No 51 are NOT attending our IGLPI affairs since September 10, 2006.

When the elected LIGHTS attended the GLP elected officers proficiency examinations at Trece Martires Lodge No 350 last December 30, 2006, and invited the others there to attend their installation, then DDGM VW Marasigan told them that they are EXPELLED and should leave as they cannot take the examinations

What is SAD is that there are MANY MORE Master Masons awaiting to be EXPELLED and which GM YU has still to identify.

The BRITTLE THREAD HAS PARTED !!!

WHAT INJUSTICE !!!….

WHAT A CHRISTMAS and NEW YEARS GIFT to BROTHERHOOD!!!.

January 6, 2007 JVB

35. More on Cabletow

2007-03-15T10:08:00.000+08:00

DECEMBER 14, 2006 EMAIL

THE CABLETOW OF THE GLP

The publication of the CABLETOW is intended to be informational and
educational to the members of the Fraternity within the Grand Lodge jurisdiction, other jurisdiction and the limited public. In the Proposed GLP Five (5) Year Program, a proposed Education Program was included with an objective “ to help enlighten the public on Masonry in order to enjoin their goodwill and enhance our good image”. In the Activities portion, was “ to supervise the edition and publication of the Cabletow and monitor other Lodges / Districts publications “.

Under the term of MWB Hermogenes E Ebdane Jr, extra care was done to determine the exact concept, intentions, directions, contents, coverage of each issue in order to deliver the correct and accurate information or teaching on tenets and principles pf Freemasonry. The whole draft is carefully edited and approved at the highest level prior to printing You have seen the quality of each issues.

The article on page 32-38, Sept to Oct 2006 Issue are informative but self-serving and slanted and lacks depth. What were mentioned were only those information that will lead to the conclusion – that the Grand Master is an absolute monarch unless his acts are disapproved at ANCOM. And so, he can declare persons and lodges or grand lodges as “ clandestine & #8221;.by his own definitions.. What is alleged is that the GLP is regular while others are irregular or as the author termed it as “ bastardo” What a DESPICABLE term !. If we DESCENDED from the Grand Oriente Espanol, from the Grand Lodge of the Philippine Islands, from the Grand Logia Regional de Filipinas, from the Grand Lodge of California, from the Grand Lodge of the Philippines, as our lodges originated from and which together banded to form the IGLPI, what do you call our Mother Grand Lodges?

Firstly, NOTHING in the GLP Constitution mentions about how and the procedures of forming a Grand Lodge There is NO NEED for a DISPENSATION from the former Grand Lodge. When the Mindanao brethren petitioned to form the Grand Lodge of Mindanao, the GLP

Committee on Resolutions and the Board of General Purposes REJECTED it. The Grand Lodge of Nevada was formed WITHOUT asking any Dispensation from the Grand Lodge of California. We have not read in the history of Cavite Lodge No 2 of any Dispensation being sought before they joined the other two (2) Lodges to form the GLPI in 1912. The Gran Logia Regional de Filipinas was organized in the Philippines by the Grande Oriente Espanol in 1906 and predates the GLPI and both quarreled but co-existed until they MERGED in 1917 as the GLP, WITHOUT ASKING Dispensation from any other Grand Lodge.

Secondly, it is ONLY WHEN LODGES ARE DISSOLVED, that the Lodge CHARTER is VOLUNTARILY SURRENDERED to the Grand Lodge. Such ACT of SURRENDER shall only be final when APPROVED and ACCEPTED by the Grand Lodge (see GLP Constitution on Dissolution of Lodges). The Lodge can again be REACTIVATED just like the Saigon Lodge and one recent lodge last ANCOM. The Lodges transferred to IGLPI and so, they are NOT BEING DISSOLVED.

Thirdly, the Lodges Declaration of Independence is itself terminating the Grand Lodge AUTHORTITY over the Lodge. The CHARTER represents this authority. New CHARTERS were granted by the IGLPI to the affiliated Lodges; hence, they exist regularly and lawfully.

Fourthly, Cavite Lodge No 2 still keeps in its ARCHIVE, its CHARTER granted by the Grand Lodge of California, for posterity sake. It was NOT turned-in or surrendered or asked for by the Grand Lodge of California.

Fiftly, the CHARTER was intentionally NOT RETURNED to the GLP as we got wind of its intention to gather the REMNANTS or LOYALIST to let them
OPERATE the Lodges using the CHARTERs returned by the IGLPI Lodges. They have ILLEGALLY APPOINTED Acting WMs and other officers who are NOT QUALIFIED. They intend to disrupt our satisfactory compliance to a Standard for Recognition by making it appear that the former Lodges continue to exist and remain LOYAL to the GLP.

Sixthly, in the history of Lodges movement from one Grand Lodge to another Grand Lodge, the NAMES of the Lodges were RETAINED but the Lodge number was CHANGED or RETAINED. The four (4) London Lodges formed the Grand Lodge of England were NUMBERED. The Lodges, which formed the GLP, were also RENUMBERED.

Seventhly, there were MORE attendees in the September 10, 2006 constitution and organization of the IGLPI. What was counted by the Cabletow were those declared as “ clandestine” so as to picture a FEW members. Actually ALL Lodge members including LMLs, LMPs, Dual or Plural are members of IGLPI UNLESS they DEMIT, or are SUSPENDED or EXPELLED by the IGLPI The Lodge members, their temples, records, documents, funds, properties, etc are with us in the IGLPI. What BROKE AWAY were SEVEN (7) Lodges NOT 113 Brethrens..

Eighthly, the message of MW Frederick L Sorsabal, Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of California, as printed in the Cabletow is INCOMPLETE. It should include “ In other words, until we receive official notification from the Grand Lodge of the Philippines that a particular lodge has been declared clandestine, no action will be taken to require a member of a California lodge and a lodge in the Philippines to sever his relationship with the Philippine lodge. However, you should not admit visitors from the abovementioned lodges until the situation is clarified.”

Surely, the key word is “ recognition” to be admitted as a regular Grand Lodge. The controversial standards is again on “ territorial jurisdiction “ which issue had been DEBUNKED in recent times as NOW MORE THAN One (1) Grand Lodge exist in states or countries or provinces. UP to now, the GLP have NOT declared the Lodges as clandestine as it insist to REGAIN the lodges to include its members, properties and funds. I sent an e-mail to MW Sorsabal last September 14, 2006 attaching the “ Issues and Concerns for Cavite Masons Number 7” for the Grand Master to appreciate our rough and rugged journey in search for the true light. It could shed understanding on the position of IGLPI on the GLP GM Edicts 232 and others.

Ninetly, we should remember Albert Pike who said “ The word of a Mason, like the word of a knight in times of chivalry, once given must be sacred”..

Lastly, the IGLPI satisfy ALL the Standards for Recognition in the world, to include that of the GLP.

Obviously, we cannot expect to have this printed in the Cabletow. We could probably not match the reach of the GLP. We hope we find space in the west_to_east. We are pursuing with earnest the quest for recognition, which usually takes time

Thank you very much for the opportunity to be heard.

Bro Jim Bantolo

34. Re: Cabletow Article

2007-03-15T10:05:00.000+08:00

DECEMBER 16, 2006 EMAIL

WORTHY BROTHER

Thank you for your kind sympathy but we in the IGLPI no longer care what else the GLP does. We have already seen it all that's why we formed our own. No matter what the GLP or Brother Lazaro calls it we don't care.

What is important to us is that we can practice the true tenets of freemasonry, we have harmony, and we are happy together as brothers. Here nobody gripes against the GM unlike where we came from there are so many gripes against the GM but they do not want to do anything about it. We have been delivered from these ills.

Just to contest a bit what was written there. Pilar Lodge, Bagong Buhay Lodge, Cavite Lodge (ALL CENTURY OLD LODGES) existed before the GLP so the GLP cannot have proprietary rights over these Lodges which were already Chartered long before the GLP came to existence.

ONE MORE THING... HOW CAN A CHILD BORN AHEAD OF HIS MOTHER BE CALLED "BASTARDO"?

Yes, Pilar Lodge for instance did not return the Charter GLP gave but neither did it return the charter issued by Gran Oriente Espanol in 1894, meaning these charters are now part of its archives. Pilar Lodge No. 3 is now using a new charter issued by the IGLPI.

By the way we have three hundred members but the GLP expunged only 124. Why not expunge the rest of the 176? Because it will be very alarming... the number is just too much to ignore.

What could be the reason why the GLP did not sanction the UGLP when it declared independence? The GLP simply ignored the UGLP... because they don't have names and numbers. Now the GLP even drafted its GM as one of the candidates for JGW.

We are different.. we are serious... we have valid reasons (NOT JUST GRIPES) to leave the GLP and form our own Independent Grand Lodge with the proper constitution, enabling codes are now being formulated: (Administrative Code, Legslative Code, Judicial Code, Election and Appointments Code) to ensure proper implementation of the Constitution instead of having to amend it every ANCOM by inserting so many EDICTS identified with the GM who issued it to perpetuate their names.

BROTHER LAZARO spoke of absolute power of the GLP. Yes the GLP not the GM has absolute power. THE GLP AND THE GM ARE NOT SYNONYMOUS. THE GM SHOULD EXERCISE THESE ABSOLUTE POWERS OF THE GRAND LODGE WITH UTMOST TEMPERANCE, FORTITUDE, PRUDENCE, AND JUSTICE. WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN THE EVIL OF ABSOLUTE POWER IF WIELDED IN THE PERSONAL INTEREST OF THE WIELDER AND NOT FOR THE INTEREST OF THE GREATER MAJORITY OF THE BRETHREN. THESE ARE BUT A FEW DIFFERENCES.

THERE IS NO NEED TO COMPARE OUR TEACHINGS AND RITUALS BECAUSE THEY ARE ONE AND THE SAME. Our mother GRAND LODGE IS THE GRAND LODGE OF THE PHILIPPINES (GLP) AND ITS MEMBERS WE CALL BROTHERS. SO IF BROTHER LAZARO CALLS US "BASTARDO" WHOM IS HE INSULTING?

We have authentic certificates issued by the GLP when we were initiated, passed and raised as Masons. WE WERE FIRST MADE MASONS IN OUR HEART, ONLY NEXT IN A DULY CONSTITUTED LODGE OF F & AM, SO NOT EVEN A THOUSAND EDICTS WILL SUFFICE TO MAKE US CLANDESTINE...WHAT DOES A GLP MASON KNOW THAT WE DON'T KNOW? WHAT RITUAL DO THEY PERFORM THAT WE CANNOT. BUT LET ME ASK YOU IF THE GLP PRACTICES HARMONY, JUSTICE PRUDENCE AND THE LIKES... MUCH AS THE GLP WANTS HARMONY IT CANNOT DO ANYTHING BECAUSE IT IS THE GM WHO DECIDES WHETHER TO HAVE HARMONY OR NOT, WHETHER TO PRACTICE JUSTICE OR NOT...

THERE IS NO MORE SENSE IN BELABORING OUR POINT BECAUSE WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN THE REAL LIGHT IN FREEMASONRY.,.. NOT JUST THE ONE WE PHYSICALLY SEE WHEN THE HOODWINK IS REMOVED FROM OUR EYES. THE REAL LIGHT IS NOT IN THE RITUALS, PURPLES AND HABILIMENTS... THEY ARE IN OUR HEARTS
AND MINDS... SO THEY WANT TO CALL US CLANDESTINE, BASTARDO WHATEVER... IT'S ALRIGHT BECAUSE WHEN WE CALL THEM BROTHERS THEY WILL BE THE SAME..

WE HAVE ALREADY FORGIVEN BROTHER LAZARO LONG BEFORE HE EVEN THOUGHT OF WRITING HIS ARTICLE. May the GAOTU forgive our brothers who continue to persecute us...

WHY CANT WE JUST LEAVE IN HARMONY EVEN IF WE BELONG TO DIFFERENT GRAND LODGES? THE MORE HATRED YOU HAVE IN YOUR HEART THE HEAVIER IT IS GOING TO BE SO WHY HATE?

BROTHERLY LOVE IS BETTER, IT WILL GIVE US RELIEF AND THAT IS THE TRUTH...

BRO.NONOY

33. Re: Cabletow Article

2007-03-15T10:03:00.000+08:00

DECEMBER 11, 2006 EMAIL

Greetings!

When I opened my email this morning to check messages, I've read your msg regarding the said article published in GLP Cabletow Sept-Oct issue, p32-38, entitled Hard Talk by VW Lazaro, Jr.

VW sir, I don't speak Chabacano fluently but I am a true-bloodied Caviteno. I was born and reared until manhood in Cavite City. Chabacano language, is a combination of Spanish-Tagalog, one dialect, a pure Caviteno used in communicating with other Cavitenos, in the City, just like in Zamboanga City and Ternate, Cavite.

I was saddened that an educated brother mason incorporated in his article the word "BASTARDO". Just like what you have said, it means illegitimate, bastard, childborn out of wedlock, son of a bitch, etc. in english but its heartening, the meaning of such in Spanish - "HIJO DE PUTA", in Chabacano - "HIJO DE PUTA". A simple word like bastardo when translated to a dialect commonly used, is not only libelous, but also very offensive, malicious . . . Nobody in his right mind will say such word infront of a true-bloodied Caviteno.

VW sir, as a brother mason, I don't want to condemn him, I love him. I just want him to realize, if he is in our foot, he's a Caviteno, understand and speaks Chabacano and somebody uttered to him "YOU TRUE BLOODIED CAVITENO ARE BASTARDS, HIJO DE PUTA", can he just take it? or he"ll uttered same, or added more profane words or probably, as an instinct, he'll challenge the person, worst inflict injury (touch man's alter ego). Nobody can say what will happen. I think Caviteno brethren, Chabacano speaking or not, will agree with me. I have already reported about the article to our WM, and so with Kuyang Jimmy. I'm waiting for the reply.

Thank you very much, VW Ben for the space. Good luck and More Power.

Fraternally yours,
Bro. Ric
-----------------
bastardo daw pala ha... hmm... sayang na sayang... sana nga po ay matigil na sila sa mga kapatid na mga mapagkumbaba. don't judge us by your ignorance. yun lang po ang masasabi natin sa kanila. good day po kuyang..bro ron

32. Re: On the Cabletow Article Sept-Oct 2006 Issue

2007-03-15T10:00:00.000+08:00

DECEMBER 19, 2006 EMAIL

In Sept-Oct 2006 issue of Cabletow, the official magazine of Grand Lodge of the Philippines, an excerpt of a PDDGM paper delivered during Masonic Education held at Capitol Masonic Temple was published. The article briefly traced the formation of Lodges and Grand Lodges in England, U.S. and the Grand Lodge of the Philippines. Though it shed no new revelation, the absence of the fact that Masonic lodges under the jurisdictions of Gran Oriente Espanol, and Grand Lodge of Scotland were in existence BEFORE the formation of lodges warranted by Grand Lodge of California and the GLP itself was not mentioned. As if the ignoring the key role of brethren from Gran Oriente Espanol in influencing the idealism of Filipino illustrados to form their lodges in Spain and back home prior to the outbreak of open armed uprising, the article was equally silent about the continued existence of regular Masonic lodge operating in the Philippines under the control of Grand Lodge of Scotland. The omission, whether intended or not, did enforce the punch line of the entire article---the formation of "clandestine" lodges and the Independent Grand Lodge of the Philippine Islands. The PDDGM is of course entitled to his own opinion but is it really necessary to use the word "bastardo" to drive his point and follow it up with "So Mote It Be?

In The Lost Keys of Freemasonry, Bro Manly P. Hall (1901-1990) wrote, "He must search for the high things in lowly places and find the lowly things in the high places." In my years of writing and posting thoughts/opinions, I found the most bitter comments and rebuttals comes from those who signed their names with "PM" and in this case though the issue has nothing to do with my ramblings, the PDDGM's one liner during Masonic education and published in the official magazine of GLP is simply astounding. While members and the IGLPI were declared "clandestine," by GLP, other breakaway lodges and their United Grand Lodge of the Philippines were not! One has to wonder the level of control and civility of some of those who wear the purple of GLP.

Where the PDDGM was first prepared to be made a Mason? Who are we? I wonder if the PDDGM remembers the fourth paragraph of the Fellow Craft Charge. Labeling somebody "clandestine" is not justification for anybody to resort to name calling, it is not only immature but also irresponsible and unMasonic.

F/
Rudy Olano
Lincoln Lodge No. 34

31. Reactions to CABLETOW article

2007-03-15T09:57:00.000+08:00

DECEMBER 10, 2006 (EMAIL)

DEAR BRETHREN,I HAVE ADDED FOUR (4) OTHER ATTACHMENTS (PAGES 32 TO 38 OF CABLETOW ARTICLE OF THE SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 2006 ISSUE) FOR YOUR READY REFERENCE.YESTERDAY, SATURDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2006, DURING OUR STATED MEETING AT ARAW LODGE NR 18 AT THE GLP, COPIES OF THE SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 2006 ISSUE OF THE CABLETOW WERE DISTRIBUTED TO US. AS I WAS READING THE ARTICLE ENTITLED "HARD TALK" BY MAWI LAZARO, JR., PDDGM (NCR-E) ON PAGES 32 TO 38, I INITIALLY FOUND THE ARTICLE VERY INTERESTING AND VERY INFORMATIVE.HOWEVER, ON THE LAST PAGE (38), HIS PARTING PRINTED WORDS WERE "IN A WORD - BASTARDO (IN BOLD LETTERS)! SO MOTE IT BE!". THE WORD "BASTARDO" NOT ONLY SHOCKED ME BUT MAJORITY OF THE MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE SPECIALLY THE ELDERS.I PERSONALLY FOUND THE WORD "BASTARDO" UNCALLED FOR AND VERY UNMASONIC, UNKIND AND UNCHARITABLE. IT WAS ALLOWED TO BE PRINTED IN THE OFFICIAL ORGAN OF THE GLP, THE CABLETOW, WHICH NOT ONLY FINDS ITS WAY IN OUR GRAND JURISDICTION BUT IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS AND THE PUBLIC AS WELL."BASTARDO" TO MY MIND, WAS DIRECTED TOWARDS THE LODGES IN CAVITE WHICH ARE NOW UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE IGLPI AND THE MEMBERS WHOSE NAMES WERE EXPUNGED FROM THE OFFICIAL LIST OF THE GLP AND WHO WERE DECLARED "CLANDESTINE MASONS" AND SAID LODGES AS "CLANDESTINE/IRREGULAR LODGES".I MOVED FOR A RESOLUTION, WHICH WAS APPROVED, TO ASK THE INCUMBENT GRAND MASTER, MW ROMEO YU, TO FORMALLY EXPLAIN WHY HE PERMITTED THE PRINTING OF SUCH WORD IN THE CABLETOW. WHY THE GRAND MASTER? BECAUSE HE IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT HIS STAFFS AT THE GLP DOES OR FAILS TO DO. COMMAND RESPONSIBLITY! MW ROMEO YU HAS ASKED US TO BE MASONS IN CREED AND IN DEED! HE HAS ALSO ASKED US TO THINK, SPEAK AND ACT AS MASONS!.BRETHREN, MUCH LATER IN THE EVENING, I SEARCHED IN THE YAHOO EDUCATION WEBSITE THE MEANING OF BASTARDO AND THIS IS WHAT I FOUND OUT:1. "BASTARDO" IS A SPANISH WORD MEANING ILLEGITIMATE; BASTARD

2. BASTARD - A CHILD BORN OUT OF WEDLOCK; SOMETHING THAT IS IRREGULAR, INFERIOR OR DUBIOUS ORIGIN; A PERSON, SPECIALLYONE WHO IS HELD TO BE MEAN OR DISAGREEABLE.

3. SON OF A BITCH OR HIJO DE PUTA (SPANISH) - A PERSON REGARDED AS THOROUGHLY MEAN OR DISAGREEABLE.BRETHREN, THERE ARE WORDS WHICH CAN BE USED WITH DIPLOMACY AND FINESSE. WHY USE THE WORD "BASTARDO" AND ALLOW SAME TO BE PRINTED IN THE CABLETOW? PLEASE REPRODUCE THIS EMAIL AND THE FOUR (4) ATTACHED FILES AND SHARE THEM WITH THE BRETHREN SO THEY MAY KNOW ABOUT THIS MATTER. YOU HAVE MY PERMISSION TO INFORM THE BRETHREN THAT THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM ME.LET US PUT A STOP TO THIS! WHERE IS NOW HARMONY? PLEASE, LET US NEVER FORGET WHAT OUR SENIOR WARDEN SAYS DURING THE OPENING AND CLOSING OF THE LODGE "HARMONY BEING THE STRENGTH AND SUPPORT OF ALL SOCIETIES SPECIALLY OF OURS".MAY THE GAOTU BLESS AND GUIDE ALL MASONS WITHERSOEVER DISPERSED.THANK YOU AND MY WARMEST REGARDS.

FRATERNALLY YOURS,
BRO. BEN APACIBLE
KALILAYAN LODGE No. 37, LUCENA CITYPM (1992),
ARAW LODGE No. 18, MANILA PDDGM (1995),
MD No. NRC-C (FORMERLY 1-B/5)PJGL FOR METRO MANILA (1996)
CP NR +639178546266

30. GM Message Nov 28, 2006

2007-03-15T09:54:00.000+08:00

Dear Brothers in Freemasonry,

The IGLPI First Grand Assembly was held last November 25, 2006. After the Grand Lodge was opened, TWO HUNDRED TWELVE (212) delegates assembled at the Aguinaldo Shrine, Kawit, Cavite; called on Mayor Bro Federico A Poblete; raised the Philippine Flag; sang the National Anthem; laid wreath at the Aguinaldo and Rizal monument; heard the message of the Mayor; paraded to the Aguinaldo Lodge. The IGLPI Affiliated Loidges; namely: Cavite Lodge No 2, Pilar Lodge No 3, Bagong Buhay Lodge No 4, Emilio Aguinaldo Memorial Lodge No 5, Bagong Ilaw Lodge No 6, La Naval Lodge No 7, and Mendez Nunez Lodge No 8 paraded with their newly designed Lodge Standards. The Grand Line Officers also wore for the first time their newly designed and made APRONS, COLLARS, and EMBLEMS.

In the Plenary Session, the Grand Master and other Dignitaries were received; The National Anthem and Grand Lodge March were sang; A Tribute to the Flag was rendered. The Grand Chaplain rendered an Invocation. The DDGM made his Welcome Remarks. A roll call of Officers and Lodges was done. The Grand Orator gave a Grand Oration. The Grand Secretary and Grand Treasurer rendered their Reports. A 5-hour discussion, deliberation, revisions, amendments and finally ratification of the Constitution was done with fireworks signalling the Ratification. The GrandMaster gave his Report and Message. The Grand Lodge was then closed.

It was indeed a very SIGNIFICANT event. The efforts will now focus on the recognition process which we are all confident would proceed smoothly with the aid of the Great Architect of the Universe. We TRUST in GOD. We thank all of you for your kind understanding and support of our journey.

Bro Jim Bantolo

29. Issues and Concerns NR 8

2007-03-15T09:49:00.000+08:00

ISSUES AND CONCERNS FOR CAVITE MASONS- SERIES NO 8

THE IRREGULAR AND ILLEGAL ACT OF APPOINTING, ELECTING, INSTALLING LODGE OFFICERS FOR OLD / FORMER LODGES

1. GLP AGS VW Godofredo V Seneres Jr in a letter dated September 11, 2006 addressed to VW Mario G Marasigan DDGM, MD R-IV-A Cavite Province, stated that “ Upon instruction of the GM, MW Romeo A Yu, you are hereby directed to convene the Lodges whose WM and / or SW and / or JW and / or Treasurer and / or Secretary affiliated with or had been a member of the irregular Independent Grand of Free and Accepted Masons of the Philippine Islands and to conduct an election for any existing vacant position or positions in the Lodge. You shall report to the Grand Lodge of your compliance with this instruction..”

2. GLP , DDGM, VW Mario G Marasigan, then issued MD R-IV-A CIRCULAR NO 07 Series of 2006-MARASIGAN dated September 15, 2006. Under Paragraph 2 as stated “ In accordance with the letter of MW Romeo A Yu, GM of Masons of the MWGLP dated September 11, 2006 and pursuant to the Edict No 232 and 232-A, the following named brethren from their respective subordinate lodges were appointed to the position as indicated opposite their names effective 15 September 2006 :

VW Rafaelito B Sacdalan Cavite Lodge No 2 Acting WM
Bro Ramil V Huele Pilar Lodge No 15 Acting WM
WB Raul Patricio, PM Bagong Buhay Lodge no 17 Acting WM
Bro Rodrigo B Jaca # Emilio Aguinaldo Lodge No 31 Acting WM
WB Fernando R Umandap,PM Bagong Ilaw Lodge No 97 Acting WM
VW Angelito P Monge,PJGD La Naval Lodge No 269 Acting WM
Bro Edilito B Amon Mendez Nunez Lodge No 316 Acting WM
# Bro Jaca is NEVER a WARDEN.

3. On September 22, 2006 at about 6:30 pm, the above group together
with GLP DDGM Marasigan, JGL Lupisan, DGL Rillo, GLI Vicedo plus other absentee and suspended brethren assembled at the IGLPI Cavite Lodge No 2. A few brethren who arrived earlier found the Lodge doors LOCKED; then told the caretaker to go on an errand. Upon the caretaker’s return, he found the door OPENED and the LOCK MISSING. The Cavite Police was called on a report of BREAK-IN. These group HAD NO PERMISSION from the Worshipful Master of IGLPI Cavite Lodge No 2 - WM Danilo B Florendo. The IGLPI Cavite Lodge No 2 officers arrived and a verbal confrontation ensued.

IT IS THE LODGE THAT AFFILLIATED WITH THE IGLPI . THE OLD OR FORMER LODGE NO LONGER EXIST AS IS , BUT ALREADY RECHARTERED AND RENUMBERED AND NOW UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF IGLPI.

NO VACANCY OF POSITION THEREFORE EXIST. THERE IS NO BASIS TO APPOINT ANY ACTING WORSHIPFUL MASTER.

THERE IS NO BASIS TO CONVENE THE OLD / FORMER LODGES AS THEIR CHARTERS HAD BEEN TURNED-OVER . BEING SO , THERE IS NO BASIS OR AUTHORITY TO CONVENE THE LODGE, TO MEET, TO TRANSACT BUSINESS, OR TO ELECT OFFICERS.

The Acting WM JACA is IRREGULARLY APPOINTED as he has never been a WARDEN of a Lodge.

LODGE OFFICERS ARE ELECTED BY THE LODGE MEMBERS. There is NO PROVISION even in the GLP Constitution to appoint ACTING WM.

4. These GLP sponsored groups were discovered to be meeting elsewhere, in restaurants, in basements of lodges, in other lodges. The members attending were long ABSENTEE brethren., some were SUSPENDED Masons, some were Masons with pending cases in Lodge Trial Commission , some had financial problems or accountabilities with their lodges. As days passed FOUR (4) appointed Acting WM DROPPED-OFF. Replacements were Bro Joel Garcia as WM of “Cavite Lodge No 2” – a SUSPENDED 14 years ABSENTTEE mason: Bro Alexander Dimapilis as WM of “ Bagong Buhay Lodge No 17” – an ABSENTEE mason and NOT A WARDEN; WB Danilo Vilda as WM of “ Bagong Ilaw Lodge No 97” – an ABSENTTEE mason; Bro Florante Saulo as WM of “ Emilio Aguinaldo Lodge No 31” – a former SW and an ABSENTEE mason

5. Last Nov 3, 2006 , the “ Cavite Lodge No 2” met at Pintong Bato Lodge No 51 attended by alleged 5 members and 4 visitors- JGL Lupisan, DGL Catubo, GLI Vicedo, WB Punzalan. The meeting in the Lodge Hall was presided by Joel Garcia- a SUSPENDED Mason and who claims to be the lodge master. Despite the LACK of QUORUM , they continued to meet.

WHY IS GLP WITH JGL LUPISAN TOLERATING THIS ?

6. When confronted of what happened, WB Raul Patricio denounced the unmasonic manner by which his name was included in the Marasigan Circular as it is without his knowledge or consent. Another forcibly invited brethren revealed the TURO-TURO system of appointing the lodge officers, and the MORO-MORO ELECTION and the MORO-MORO INSTALLATION done by DDGM Marasigan

GLP DDGM MARASIGAN CONDONES AND VIOLATES THE GLP CONSTITUTION ON ELECTIONS, QUALIFICATIONS OF OFFICERS, AND INSTALLATION CEREMONIES PRESCRIBED- AN UNMASONIC ACT.

Nov 14, 2006. JVB

28. GM Message Nov 14,2006

2007-03-15T09:47:00.000+08:00

NOVEMBER 14, 2006 EMAIL

Dear Brothers in Freemasonry,

Fraternal Greetings from your Brothers from the Independent Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the Philippine Islands (IGLPI)..

We are sending to you this e-mail on the issue of the recent GLP GM Yu, GLP AGS VW Seneres and GLP DDGM VW Marasigan directives resulting to the illegal, irregular appointment of ACTING WMs in the old/former lodges which had already affiliated to the IGLPI and the violation of Masonic Rituals.

For your appreciation in the search for TRUTH and your understanding for the rough and rugged journey the IGLPI travels in the search for the LOST WORD.Please pass to other interested brothers who are being kept in the dark.
Fraternally yours,

Bro Jim Bantolo,
Grand Master, IGLPI

27. Issues and Concerns NR. 7

2007-03-15T09:43:00.000+08:00

ISSUES AND CONCERNS FOR CAVITE MASONS
– SERIES NO 7

1. What is the CONFUSION in the GLP on the issuance of EDICT 232 ?

On September 7, 2006 , GLP GM Yu issued Edict No 232 declaring some members Of Pilar Lodge No 15 as “ clandestine Masons “ based on the following premises
:
a. That some members of Pilar Lodge signed a Resolution declaring independence from the Grand Lodge of the Philippines and joining other Lodges in forming a new Grand Lodge outside its auspices “…

THE TRUTH - After a series of meetings , dialogues, and discussions, the members of Pilar Lodge in a Stated Meeting APPROVED a Lodge Resolution for the LODGE TO DECLARE ITS INDEPENDENCE FROM THE GLP AND JOIN OR FORM A NEW GRAND LODGE. They then SIGNED the Lodge Resolution. IT IS THE LODGE that DECLARED its INDEPENDENCE from the GLP…

THE TRUTH - The GLP history showed that there were REGIONAL GRAND LODGE created in the past in the Philippine Grand Jurisdiction .There is found in the CONSTITUTION of the GLP that the GM is empowered TO CREATE REGIONAL GRAND LODGES .There was a past history of the GLP DENYING the RESOLUTION to DECLARE a GRAND LODGE of MINDANAO. There was a history that many Lodges in Japan DECLARED THEIR INDEPENDENCE and JOINED the Grand Lodge of Japan . That on July 9, 2006 , several Lodges in Leyte and Samar DECLARED THEIR INDEPENDENCE and FORMED the UNITED GRAND LODGE of the PHILIPPINES with MW Eduard Chua as its Grand Master. .. In ALL these events, NO ONE WAS DECLARED CLANDESTINE …

b. That allegedly such Resolution had made the brethren who SIGNED it as “clandestine Mason” so far as the GLP is concerned …

THE TRUTH - In reference to Masonic documents, teachings of Mackey, the Cabletow Vol XLII No 8 August 1966, page 18.. “ A clandestine Mason is one made a Mason in, or one who is affiliated with a clandestine lodge “…

THE TRUTH – the members of Pilar Lodge just SIGNED an INTENTION. This INTENTION or LODGE RESOLUTION or WARRANT is a REQUIRED DOCUMENT before a LODGE is ACCEPTED to a NEW GRAND LODGE. JUST LIKE the members of Mindanao who SIGNED A RESOLUTION to CREATE A GRAND LODGE of MINDANAO , they also signified their intention BUT WERE NEVER DECLARED as “ clandestine Mason “ . THE GLP definition stated above is ERRONEOUS and CONFUSING and CONTRADICTORY to Masonic teachings…YET the GLP DID NOT SANCTION the UGLP of Leyte and SAMAR …

THE TRUTH – The Pilar Lodge No 15 IS NOT AND HAS NOT BEEN DECLARED a “clandestine Lodge”.

c. The Edict 232 used as premise Section 2 paragraph c Article XVII of the GLP Constitution Part II that a “ Masons membership in a Lodge shall be terminated by voluntary withdrawal therefrom…”

THE TRUTH --- In the GLP Constitution the Article PROPERLY reads ““Membership in a Lodge shall be terminated by voluntary withdrawal therefrom AFTER PROPER NOTICE IS GIVEN “….. This is the so-called DEMIT from a Lodge after a formal request and a subsequent satisfaction of requirements for the issuance of a Certificate of Good Standing. The EDICT OMITTED an IMPORTANT requirement of “proper notice “

THE TRUTH - the members ARE NOT WITHDRAWING FROM THE
LODGE. The WHOLE Lodge is WITHDRAWING from the GLP.. The members CONTINUE to be MEMBERS of PILAR LODGE . BUT PILAR LODGE shall CEASE to be a member of the GLP…

THE TRUTH -- AS the LODGE CEASES to be a member of the GLP ,,, the members of Pilar Lodge whether they failed to sign or not signed the RESOLUTION are DEEMED members of the Lodge. They SHOULD DEMIT in order to withdraw their membership from the Lodge…They will be given a CGS after satisfying all requirements…

d. That GM YU by virtue of his powers and using the above premises then declared the many brethrens as “ clandestine masons” and to be entitled to rights, privileges, benefits, charities, and courtesy due to a regular mason in the jurisdiction of the Philippines….

THE TRUTH -- There is NO PROVISION in the GLP CONSTITUTION in the declaration of “ clandestine mason “. The GM has NO POWERS on such a declaration. There is NO JUDICIAL PROCESS done in this exercise. Even the punishment of EXPULSION requires a judicial process.

THE TRUTH --- Since their Lodge are NOT DECLARED as “ clandestine lodges “ then, the members CANNOT BE DECLARED as “ clandestine Masons”

e. That the GM Yu directed that the names of “clandestine masons” be expunged from the records of the GLP as well as from the records of the APPENDANT BODIES…so that no more remembrance may be had of them as Masons forever…

THE TRUTH --- THE GM YU HAS NO POWERS over the Appendant Bodies.Why is he then USURPING the powers of the leaders of these duly separately constituted bodies ???

THE TRUTH --- to the GLP , our records will stand as we were duly made MM in the lodges of the GLP. Some of the Lodges of the IGLPI are OLDER than the GLP. Our records will STAY. Under the IGLPI, we STAND DULY RECORDED as Brethren of Lodges duly affiliated with the new Grand Lodge. We will CONTINUALLY be REMEMBERED as Masons…

f. That the GM directed that henceforth any master mason who will signify a similar INTENTION in writing or in any manner to declare their independence will suffer the same fate….

THE TRUTH --- . Where is FREE WILL to JOIN and to LEAVE ??? Both the members or the Lodges have the FREE WILL to join a Lodge or Grand Lodge and to LEAVE, This is found in the CONSTITUTION ….

g. That GM YU issued other Edicts 232 A dated September 11, 2006 and subsequent supplements thereafter declaring the IGLPI as irregular and clandestine and its member as clandestine.

THE TRUTH --- GM YU ceases to have any powers over us. Effective
September 10, 2006, the IGLPI was duly , legally lawfully , regularly CONSTITUTED in appropriate ceremonies held at the historic Aguinaldo Shrine, Kawit, Cavite attended by more than 250 brethren from Cavite and neighboring Lodges. Any Edict ISSUED by GM YU HAS NO BINDING EFFECT to IGLPI in its Grand Jurisdfiction.

THE TRUTH - As provided for in the GLP Constitution and other Grand Lodge Basis for Recognition; under the criterion of REGULARITY OF ORIGIN i.e. each Grand Lodge shall have been established by THREE or MORE REGULARLY CONSTITUTED Lodges..” The IGLPI SATISFIES this criterion.

h. That GM Yu issued Edicts No 232A alledging that a “ certain number of members of lodges mostly from the province of Cavite, ASSEMBLED at the Aguinaldo Shrine, Kawit, Cavite on September 10, 2006 TO FORM the IGLPI and TO DECLARE THEIR INDEPENDENCE from the GLP “.

THE TRUTH – Based on Mackey, Principles of Masonic Law, a MASS MEETING of Masons CANNOT ASSEMBLE and ORGANIZE a Grand Lodge.A certain NUMBER of LODGES, holding legal warrants ( duly constituted) from a Grand Lodge must MEET by their representatives and proceed to the FORMATION of a Grand Lodge. The seven(7) lodges from Cavite formed the IGLPI; they TURNED – OVER their OLD CHARTERS from their former Grand Lodge and RECEIVED a NEW CHARTER from the IGLPI.

THE TRUTH --- Yes, they got a copy of the program and then listed the names of the Grand Line officers to be declared clandestine. One Mason was erroneously declared as he was changed without correcting the program. That brother was INJURED in his person.

THE TRUTH - We are AUTHENTIC GRAND LINE OFFICERS chosen carefully from the many qualified , prepared, and worthy.

i. The GLP GM YU issued another Edict 232B dated September 18, 2006 again DECLARING certain Masons as “ Clandestine Masons” because they allegedly expressed their VOLUNTARY WITHDRAWAL of their membership from their lodges by ATTENDING at and PARTICIPATING in the formal declaration of independence made by Jaime V. Bantolo, et al in Kawit Cavite on Sunday, September 10, 2006, as SHOWN in PICTURES taken during said occasion..”

THE TRUTH – As per GLP Constitution, VOLUNTARY WITHDRAWAL from a Lodges of membership is after PROPER NOTICE is GIVEN… that is giving a LETTER OF DEMIT….. NOT BY BEING SEEN IN PHOTOS OF ATTENDING OR PARTICIPATING in a PUBLIC EVENT…

THE TRUTH - IT IS NOT JAIME V BANTOLO et al who made a formal declaration of independence. IT is the SEVEN (7) LODGES WHO DECLARED their INDEPENDENCE. IT was MW Jaime V Bantolo, Grand Master of IGLPI who presided over the ceremonies.

2. Why did the GLP GM YU do this declaration of clandestine Masons “ BY SIGHT “

Let us speculate. The GLP believed that the IGLPI will be declared sometime late September. So when , news circulated that it will be declared earlier, the GLP got its acts confused.. To prevent the declaration :

a. The GLP and their agents warned the provinces of Nueva Ecija, Bataan, Bulacan, Laguna, etc NOT TO ATTEND or ELSE ???

b. The GLP threatened to declare members clandestine at every
opportunity the lodge will make a Resolution to declare independence.. However since the resolutions were kept secret, NO names appeared.

c. They sent spies, even NAVY intelligence to take pictures or video. We caught one, who was ordered by a ranking PN officer of Lodge No 2

Edict 232 B is a declaration of “clandestine Masons by sight” . This is UNJUST. There were Masons who were ERRONEOUSLY punished when they WERE NOT EVEN THERE at Kawit on Sept 10. There were MANY MASONS there present , but NOT EVEN declared as clandestine. This is SELECTIVE JUSTICE.

3. What has been the reaction of other brothers ???

The EDICT 232 has been a TOPIC….Just like the SUSPENSION ORDERS Of our 3 WMs - it is also a product of INJUSTICE ; it is also a manifestation of how ABSOLUTE POWERS could be wielded…. By and large it becomes an OBJECT TO BE DISAPPROVED at ANCOM.

4. What are the latest acts of the GM ? of his DDGM ? of the GLP ?

Last Sept 15, 2006 the GLP AGS upon direction of the GM YU directed DDGM Marasigan to APPOINT ACTING WM for the former lodges. On September 18, 2006 , VW Marasigan UNLAWFULLY AND WITHOUT AUTHORITY appointed Acting WM for Cavite Lodge – WB Sacdalan; Pilar Lodge- SW Huelle ; for Bagong Buhay Lodge – WB Raul Patricio ; for Aguinaldo Lodge - Bro Jaca;( never a Warden ); for Bagong Ilaw Lodge – WB Umandap; for La Naval Lodge - VW Monge ; for Mendez Nunez Lodge – SW Amon.

Ddgm Marasigan met these masons, directed them to gather as many members they could, meet, elect their officer, install them, and compete with the IGLPI

The idea is to CIRCUMVENT sovereignty of the IGLPI.

They have NO CHARTER. So how did they meet ?. Under what authority did they conduct business ? MAYROON daw silang TEMPORARY CHARTER !!! Is there such a thing???

As they met at Cavite lodge and found it LOCK, they forcibly OPENED the locked door. The POLICE came to investigate. – a case of BREAK-IN. DDGM Marasigan DID NOTHING. Parang walang nangyaring crimen ????

Chief of Police, Silang town pa naman siya.

They then met at Restaurants, at the basement of IGLPI lodges, at other lodges of the GLP. We saw even SUSPENDED members who were ENTICED to attend. Even ABSENTEE members were called and forced to ATTEND. They conducted a MOCK ELECTION; that is , members were pointed to become WM, SW and JW. Kung sino-sino na lang ang pinili na maging Lodge officer. Pati mga SUSPENDED , pati mga absentee,, pati mga may KASO, pati mga may ATRASO sa Lodge , pinili na nila They meet with five (5) to 7 attendees augmented by members from other lodges to show numbers……Ganyan ba and mga magiging pinuno ng logia???they had MOCK MEETINGS , MOCK ELECTIONS, They also had a MOCK INSTALLATION with Marasigan as Installing Officer. WHAT A FARCE!!! BINABASTOS MASYADO AND RITUALS NG MASONERYA !!! with JGL Lupisan blessings. THIS IS CLANDESTINE LODGE with Clandestine Masons….THIS HAS TO STOP !!! BUT WHO WILL STOP THEM ?? WHEN THEY WERE ORDERED BY THEIR GLP GM …

WHAT IS HAPPENING TO FREEMASONRY GRAND MASTER??? PAST GRAND MASTERS???? BRETHREN ????

WILL YOU ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN ????

To DGLs, GLIs, Bros… How do you elect the Lodge officers ? When can you elect an officer ?/ What is the process before you elect the Lodge officers?

5. What is the IGLPI doing so far ?

The IGLPI moves on. We had our District Meetings. We have installed the Lodges GLIs. We conduct our regular EXECOM Meetings. We have issued seven (7) CIRCULARS. We had our Constitution deliberated at lodge levels. We will assemble in November to RATIFY the CONSTITUTION. We hold meetings with other interested Lodges and Districts.We conduct Necrological Services and Rites to departed members. We will conduct a Lodge of Remembrance in October 29. We prepare plans. We continue to consolidate . We are preparing our documents for recognition.as we SATISFY all requirements and basis for recognition. We will have a Grand Assembly in November.

Meanwhile, we are saddened by the desperate acts of GLP leaders in District 4A . They follow blindly the directions of their GM Yu to STOP IGLPI. So we had to consolidate and defend as we move forward.

GRAND LODGE OF THE PHILIPPINES IS NOT REGISTERED WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION..

When we were registering the IGLPI at SEC , our man discovered that the GLP HAS NOT RENEWED ITS REGISTRATION AFTER THE 50 YEARS HAD ELAPSED. NO WONDER , the GLP cannot sue or be sued.

Based on documents, the Grand Lodge of the Philippine Islands (GLPI) formed by American Masons in the Philippines in 1912 was incorporated in 1916.

In 1917, the GLP was formed with the merging of the GLPI of 10 lodges and the 27 lodges of MW Kalaw.

But GLP history records 1912 as its founding with MWB Eugene Stafford as its first GM.

6. Where do we seek redress ?

There is NO FORUM above the Grand Master or NOT CONTROLLED by the GM YU to seek redress within the organization. The Board of General Purposes only meets at the call of the GM. It will take the Grand Lodge meeting at ANCOM to DISAPPROVED the ACTS of the GM.i.e. if the GM will TOLERATE this…

Meanwhile HARM has been done. The Lodge, the IGLPI, the members HAD been WRONGED.. Any wrong or injustice done CANNOT BE UNDONE.

What if other Grand Lodges REACTED and sanctioned the IGLPI ? What if the Grand Lodge meeting at ANCOM DISAPPROVED the ACTS of GM YU

Where else do we go ??? COURT OF JUSTICE ??? FORUM OF PUBLIC OPINION ???

7. What is this COURT CHARGES filed AGAINST Grand Master Romeo A Yu ?

In the afternoon of October 13, 2006 , several brethren from Pintong Bato Lodge No 51 of the Grand Lodge of the Philippines , charged in the Regional Trial Court of Bacoor, Cavite, Philippines, the Grand Master MW Romeo A Yu , the Grand Secretary MWB Danilo Angeles , and the Master of Lodge 51, WM Punzalan. It is a classic case for the first time in GLP, of a case of INJUNCTION WITH DAMAGES , a TRO for Edict 232 B, and several other charges that we heard. An AMENDED COMPLAINT was submitted in Court to INCLUDE DDGM Mario Marasigan .It was said that MORE CHARGES will be filed in several courts in Cavite Province by many more brethren whose name and persons and dignity were INJURED and UNJUSTLY PUNISHED WITHOUT MASONIC TRIAL; WITHOUT DUE PROCESS

The first court hearing was made last October 19, 2006 . Except for WM Punzalan, the three(3) others DEFENDANTS were ABSENT. The Judge after the lawyers presentations, ruled to grant a 20 days Restraining Order. Next hearing will be on Friday, October 27, 2006.

WHERE IS FREEMASONRY IN THE PHILIPPINES GOING ???

Corrected copy.JVB. October 22, 2006

26. California Visitation Issue

2007-03-15T09:41:00.000+08:00

LAS PALMAS PONDEROSA LODGE No. 366 F.&A.M.
FRESNO, CALIFORNIA

Volume VI, Issue 9
The Las Palmian
October 2006

News From Grand Lodge

Events Involving the Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of the Philippines

The Grand Lodge of California has an agreement with the Grand Lodge of the Philippines that no lodges in California will officially receive the Grand Master of Masons in the Philippines, nor host any official event for him, until expressly permitted in writing by me as Grand Master. Permission to do so can only be given when the Grand Lodge of the Philippines has fulfilled certain conditions which they agreed to last October. I regret to inform you that these conditions have not been met.

I am therefore informing you that no lodge in California is to receive the Grand Master of the Philippines at any lodge event, nor host any event for him, unless and until you have been notified in writing of my approval for the same as Grand Master. Full and complete compliance with this directive is expected. Any breach of this directive will have severe consequences for the lodge, or individual Masons, involved.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WHAT IS THE AGREEMENT OF THE GRAND LODGE OF CALIFORNIA AND THE GRAND LODGE OF THE PHILIPPINES ALL ABOUT?

On 9/2/06, XXXXX> wrote:
RW Sir Jimmy,

We just got a directive from the Grand Lodge of California, That wecan not receive the Grand Master of the Philippines here because of an agreement between the two Grand Lodges. We, I for one is really surprised what was the agreement all about. According to the letter from our Grand Master, the GLP has not complied until now. So please enlighten us what is going on.
Fraternally,

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EMAIL REPLY:
The agreement referred to is the Concordat signed between the GM of California and MW Hermogenes Ebadane last year on or about the GLC Ancom, which MW Ebdane attended.

The problem between the GLP and the GLC stem from allegedly inaction of the GLP to issue CGS for those GLP brethren who are petitioning for membership in the lodges in the GLC. The Concordat mentioned that as a problem and suipposedly the GLP was going to make improvements in the communications.

You of course know the masonic protocol. When a Filipino mason applies for membership in a lodge in California, the Secreatary of that lodge will send the application to the GLC, the Grand secretary of the GLC will send it to the Grand sec of GLP, who in turn will send the letter with a request for the issuance of the CGS. This is where the problem lies/ Many a times, the lodge do not issue a CGS because the applicant brother is not up to date with his dues here. And this is where the problem lies and where the delay is caused.

At any rate, the Grand Master is not going to the United States already. The letter request is for those who wanted to join the entourage of the GM. They wanted an invitation from the GLC so they can get visas for themselves. The GM has a VIsa. It is for those who wanted to join him.
Because there is no improvement in the issuance of CGS, the GM there decided to issue your circular banning any lodge from receiving GM Yu.

Alam mo naman na ang panimula nito ay mga Filipino brethren din na hindi nagbabayad dito ng dues nila tapos they expect to get a CGS.

I dont intend to visit any lodge in Califnornia during my term. But I will go to LA as I will be the guest speaker of the PMMAAI. And even then, I am even thinking of the wisdom of going to the US in the first place, when I can spen that money visiting local lodges here.
Hope the foregoing explains adequately the situation.

Fraternal regards to you kuya.
Jimmy

25. GM Message Sept 15, 2007

2007-03-15T09:39:00.000+08:00

Letter to GLP GM Yu from IGLPI

SEPTEMBER 15, 2006 EMAIL

Dear Brothers in Freemasonry,

Again our Fraternal Greetings. The Most Worshipful Independent Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the Philippine Islands is proud to present to you and to all those other Brothers and Lodges you may wish to send this CONSTITUTION of the IGLPI. It is a democratic constitution with powers diffused to the leaders and other officers and Committees or Bodies or Councils. The other Part on Ordinances are under formulation. You will see a great difference.

We hope to achieve the goals and Masonic aspirations we all know and understand. We hope to make the Masonic tenets, principles and teachings as our guide post in governance.
Please pass so that the others may know that we are indeed a lawfully legally constituted Grand Lodge with century old and old Lodges affiliated with us.
Please pass to our Cavite brethrens whereever they may be even in other Grand Jurisdiction so they will appreciate the journey we went through.

Fraternally yours,

Jaime V Bantolo
Grand Master

24.Message Sept 12, 2007

2007-03-15T09:37:00.000+08:00

Dear Most Worshipful sirs,

In behalf of the Grand Officers, District Officers , Officers and Members of Seven (7) Lodges affiliated with the new Most Worshipful Independent Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the Philippine Islands, I most respectfully and fraternally extend our warm friendship and Masonic Greetings to the Conference of Grand Masters of Masons of North America.

Please be informed MW sirs, that the IGLPI based in Cavite Province, Republic of the Philippine, and composed of initially seven (7) century old and old Lodges in the Masonically historical province of Cavite, formally declared their Independence from the present Grand Lodge of the Philippines and united freely and rightfully to organize and constitute the Independent Grand Lodge of the Philippine Islands , in the afternoon of September 10, 2006 at historic President General Worshipful Brother Emilio Aguinaldo Shrine, Kawit, Cavite, Philippines. The program included an Invocation, National Anthem, Pledge to the Flag, Welcome Address, Reading of the Declaration of Independence, Turn-in of Old Charters, Lowering of the Lodge Standards, Oath Taking of the Interim Grand Lodge Officers, Constitution Ceremonies of the New Grand Lodge, Presentation of New Charters , Presentation of the new Grand Lodge Seal, Inaugural Address of the Grand Master, Keynote Sppech of the Guest Speaker, Singing og the new Grand Lodge song. Fellowship. We had a new Constitution for further ratification. Our theme is " A FRESH START FOR TRUE MASONRY"

We are the new second Grand Lodge organized and constituted in the Philippines. We anticipate more Lodges to join us barring any hindrance from the Grand Lodge of the Philippines which issued an EDICT 232 which would declare any member as "Clandestine" for signing resolutions to declare independence and join / form new Grand Lodges.

We wrote to introduce ourselves and our new Grand Lodge to you MW sirs. We will continue to communicate and present other documents necessary for recognition .

Our member, VWB Rolly Sarmiento, PDDGM, who is now based in New York, will assist us in all our endeavors thereat.

MW sirs, please find pleasure and understanding of our journey, as you read my Inaugural Address.

Again our most sincerest thanks and brotherly affection to all Brother Masons.

Fraternally yours,
(sgd)
MW Jaime V Bantolo
Grand Master

23. Doctrine of Exclusive Territorial Jurisdiction

2007-03-15T09:30:00.000+08:00

The Doctrine of Exclusive Territorial Jurisdiction: What Does It Mean? What Has it Caused? Is It Useful?
by Paul M. Bessel(1) (12/28/98 version) (Please note that this article was written in 1998, and some of the information in it may be out of date now.)

Introduction

To the extent that Masons are aware of the "doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction," most believe it means that there can only be one regular, recognized Grand Lodge in each State of the United States and in each other country, that every lodge in any U.S. State or foreign country must belong to the one Grand Lodge in that jurisdiction, and that every regular Grand Lodge adheres to this important policy and has done so for a long time.

This belief has real results. For example, some Masons believe that because of the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction, it is not Masonically legal for any Grand Lodge to recognize a Prince Hall Grand Lodge, as there would then be two recognized Grand Lodges in the same state. Some also believe that this doctrine prohibits any Grand Lodge from recognizing two or more Grand Lodges in any country, such as France where there are several Grand Lodges, more than one of which is "regular" in the sense of following the same basic landmarks that we do.

However, according to expert Masonic authorities the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction does not mean what most Masons think it means. It has never really been in full effect, certainly not in the great majority of places around the world, and not even in the United States. Yet the existence of this doctrine, or of what Masons think the doctrine is, causes problems and may be more harmful than helpful. It has been in the process of disappearing for a while, and it might be helpful for Masonry as a whole to consider whether it should or should not be adhered to now, even in theory.

Non U.S. Grand Lodges with Lodges in Areas Where they Recognize Local Grand Lodges
Most Grand Lodges in the world take it for granted that it is normal and Masonically acceptable for any regular Grand Lodge to recognize and charter Lodges in areas where other Grand Lodges also recognize and charter Lodges, and also to recognize two or more Grand Lodges in the same geographical territory.

The most regular of regular Grand Lodges, the United Grand Lodge of England, today (1997) has chartered dozens of Lodges in several provinces in Canada, Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, Chile, Portugal, several states in Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and Togo, at the same time the UGLE recognizes Grand Lodges in each of these countries and provinces.(2) Also, in December 1994 the UGLE (United Grand Lodge of England) officially recognized the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Massachusetts, at the same time continuing its recognition of the A.F.& A.M. Grand Lodge of Massachusetts, with the full support of that Grand Lodge in Massachusetts.(3) Neither the United Grand Lodge of England or the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts felt that the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction prohibited this, or if they might have thought the doctrine prohibited this action, they took it and supported it anyway.

The Grand Lodges of Scotland and Ireland today (1997) also have many lodges chartered under them in countries, provinces, and states where they also recognize local Grand Lodges.(4)
In the past, the Grand Lodge of Hamburg, in Germany, instituted three lodges in New York, and the Grand Orient of France chartered or recognized lodges outside the local Grand Lodges in Louisiana and Pennsylvania.(5) However, in the United States, some still say that the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction means that "there can be but one recognized Grand Lodge in a state and that it must have exclusive territorial jurisdiction therein."(6)

The Doctrine of Exclusive Territorial Jurisdiction in the United States

The concept of there being only one Grand Lodge permitted in any geographical area is so much an American one, not accepted by Masons anywhere else, that it is sometimes called the "American Doctrine."(7) But even here, it has often been ignored. A lodge in Indian Territory, now Oklahoma, that was chartered by the Grand Lodge of Kansas refused to join the Grand Lodge of Indian Territory and apparently was permitted to remain with the Grand Lodge of Kansas in violation of the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction. The Grand Lodge of Minnesota chartered two lodges in Dakota Territory, one before and one after the formation of the Grand Lodge there in 1875. The Grand Lodge of Illinois refused for some time to take jurisdiction over three lodges in its territory that had been chartere by Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and Tennessee, and the Grand Lodge of Illinois allowed the Grand Lodge of Missouri to revoke the charter of a lodge located in Illinois. The Grand Lodge of Wisconsin issued a dispensation for a lodge in Illinois, claiming the right to do so because Illinois had not stopped the Grand Lodge of Missouri from doing the same thing in Illinois. The Grand Lodge of Missouri chartered lodges in Illinois, and also kept two lodges in New Mexico on its rolls even after it recognized the Grand Lodge of New Mexico in 1877.(8)

An example of one lodge shows how Grand Lodges have ignored the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction whenever they wished. Alexandria-Washington Lodge No. 22, then called Alexandria Lodge and located in Virginia, was chartered in 1783 by the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania, although the Grand Lodge of Virginia had been founded in 1777, six years earlier, had a Grand Master and other officers in place, and was operating in a peaceful country from 1783 through 1788, and met in November 1784, October 1785, October 1786, and October 1787, all during the time when Alexandria Lodge continued to be chartered by the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania, and neither the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania nor the Grand Lodge of Virginia, nor Alexandria Lodge, saw anything amiss or tried to change the Grand Lodge affiliation of Alexandria Lodge.(9)

Five years later, in 1788, Alexandria Lodge surrendered its Pennsylvania Charter and obtained one from the Grand Lodge of Virginia (for reasons that had nothing to do with territorial exclusivity, but Alexandria Lodge's question whether the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania should declare its independence from the Grand Lodge of England merely because the United States had won its independence)(10), but just 12 years later in 1800 the city of Alexandria was no longer in Virginia. The District of Columbia had then been founded and it included Alexandria.

In 1811 when the Grand Lodge of DC was formed all the lodges under the Grand Lodge of Maryland and Virginia that were then in DC territory joined the Grand Lodge of DC that covered their territory -- except Alexandria Lodge, which insisted on remaining with the Grand Lodge of Virginia even though it was not located in Virginia.(11) Again, it appears that neither the Grand Lodge of DC nor the Grand Lodge of Virginia objected to this apparent violation of the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction, which was undoubtedly promulgated by that date. As with many things in Freemasonry, we are not sure when the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction began, but Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia indicates that the Grand Lodge of New York stated it in 1796 and "[t]he idea spread by common consent and regard for its merit."(12)

The Grand Lodge of Virginia also apparently ignored exclusive territorial jurisdiction by granting a dispensation and then a charter to Baltimore Union Lodge No. 21 in Maryland. Although Brown's history of Virginia Freemasonry says no invasion of jurisdiction was intended,(13) implying that Virginia was not aware if a Grand Lodge existed in Maryland, the History of Freemasonry in Maryland points out that Virginia kept Baltimore Union Lodge on its rolls from 1788 until after 1800, and that when the Grand Lodge of Virginia found out that the Grand Lodge of Maryland was functioning it "should have, at once, revoked the Charter" of the Baltimore Lodge under the Grand Lodge of Virginia.(14) Virginia did not do so, and Maryland does not seem to have complained, indicating that the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction was again ignored. The Grand Lodge of Virginia also chartered Lexington Lodge No. 25 in Kentucky and kept that lodge on its rolls during a time when that was not part of the Commonwealth of Virginia.(15)

In the 1860's the Grand Lodge of Louisiana complained to other U.S. Grand Lodges that the Grand Orient of France had invaded Louisiana's territorial integrity by recognizing a body in Louisiana that was not accepted by the Grand Lodge there, and the other U.S. Grand Lodges withdrew their recognition of the Grand Orient of France.(16) While this shows support for the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction, there have been other instances where U.S. Grand Lodges have not reacted at all when a Grand Lodge told them about another Grand Lodge supposedly violating their territorial integrity. For a recent example, the Grand Lodge of Oregon complained to the other Grand Lodges that the Grand Lodge of Idaho violated Oregon's territorial integrity in 1993(17) (by recognizing a Prince Hall Grand Lodge whose jurisdiction covered both Oregon and Idaho), but all the other U.S. Grand Lodges, except Georgia, refused to take any action. Again, the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction was ignored by U.S. Grand Lodges.

In 1960 (and for many decades before then), the Grand Lodges of Alabama, California, District of Columbia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Vermont, and Wisconsin still recognized both the Grand Lodge of France (GLF) and the National Grand Lodge National (GLNF).(18) A prominent Masonic book on this subject said at that time, "It is evident ... that 'exclusive jurisdiction' no longer means that all lodges within a defined territory must belong to the same Grand Lodge."(19)

Even today (1997) Grand Lodges in the United States have chartered lodges in jurisdictions where other Grand Lodges, recognized ones, exist. The Grand Lodge of Massachusetts has several lodges in Panama, Chile, and Japan, where there are existing Grand Lodges that are recognized by the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts as well as others.(20)

In Alaska, where the Grand Lodge of Alaska has 19 or 20 chartered lodges, the Grand Lodge of Washington State also has 3 or 4 chartered lodges.(21) It is sometimes pointed out that the Grand Lodges of Alaska and Washington concur in this arrangement. So, these two Grand Lodges that supposedly give lip service to the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction both accept the fact that some lodges in the territory covered by the Grand Lodge of Alaska can continue to give allegiance to a different Grand Lodge.

Another example of American Grand Lodges taking actions that violate the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction, as that doctrine is generally believed, is furnished by the 28 American Grand Lodges that have recognized additional Grand Lodges in their own jurisdictions in the last nine years. The Grand Lodge of Connecticut, which might have said that no other Grand Lodge could legitimately charter lodges in its state, instead recognized the Grand Lodge of Prince Hall Masonry in that state in 1989.(22) More than half of the Grand Lodges in the United States have since taken similar actions(23), and the United Grand Lodge of England, the Grand Lodge of Ireland, the Grand Lodges of at least 6 Canadian Provinces, and other regular Grand Lodges have also recognized Prince Hall Grand Lodges in states where they continue to recognize the "traditional" Grand Lodges. The momentum is definitely in the direction of more Grand Lodges doing this soon.

At least one American jurisdiction recently very specifically rejected the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction for itself. The Grand Lodge of Oregon, in June 1997, changed a part of its Constitution that previously read, "Powers and Activities of the Grand Lodge ... Jurisdiction, Exclusive -- To exercise exclusive Original Jurisdiction over all matters pertaining to Ancient Craft Masonry in the State of Oregon," to read, "To exercise exclusive Original Jurisdiction over all matters pertaining to Ancient Craft Masonry, for its members, in the State of Oregon." (emphasis added) This was done, it was said, to enable the Oregon Grand Lodge to recognize its Prince Hall counterpart. The report of the Jurisprudence Committee specifically talked about exclusive and concurrent territorial jurisdiction, and said, "Adoption of this proposal would make the State of Oregon an area of concurrent jurisdiction in which any and all Grand Lodges would be free to operate....The decision is irrevocable." The committee recommended that this change not be adopted, but it was adopted by the Grand Lodge in a vote where ¾ was necessary for adoption.(24)

Michigan's Grand Lodge took similar action in 1995 and 1996. Its pertinent portion of its Constitution now reads, "This Grand Lodge...is the only source of authority on all matters pertaining to Ancient Craft Masonry within its Chartered Lodges in the States of Michigan." (emphasis added) The explanation accompanying this change when it was proposed said that exclusive territorial jurisdiction was a "self declared authority." Instead, the Grand Lodge of Michigan said it is supreme over those Lodges which have received their Charters from that Grand Lodge, which by accepting their Charters agreed to that supremacy for those Lodges.(25)

Stewart W. Miner, Grand Secretary of the Grand Lodge of DC and a Past Grand Master of Virginia, and a respected scholar of Freemasonry, made the following observations about the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction in 1992: (a) it no longer exists, (b) it was only applied selectively in the past, (c) inconsistent application encouraged challenge, and (d) American Grand Lodges modified their interpretation of it when they deemed it prudent to do so.(26)

What the Doctrine of Exclusive Territorial Jurisdiction Really Means In addition to the problems already mentioned, there is a great difference between what most people think the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction means, and what the authoritative Masonic body in the United States on this subject says it means. It has already been mentioned that most think the doctrine means, as Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia says, that "there can be but one recognized Grand Lodge in a state and that it must have exclusive territorial jurisdiction therein." However, the Commission on Information for Recognition of the Conference of Grand Masters of Masons of North America has defined the doctrine in a very different way.

This Commission was established by the Conference of Grand Masters in 1952. Its purpose was and is to compile information that can be useful for individual Grand Lodges in making their determinations about which Grand Lodges to recognize.(27) The Commission has developed a reputation of being very distinguished and knowledgeable, and although the Commission says, "The Commission neither advises nor recommends that recognition be given to any Grand Lodges....,"(28) it is considered so knowledgeable about issues relating to recognition that its recommendations are sometimes referred to as constituting "recognition" by the Conference of Grand Masters and many Grand Lodges make all their decisions on recognition based on the recommendations of this Commission.(29)

The Commission on Information for Recognition has had to deal with the subject of the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction in great detail, and its conclusions are entitled to great weight. The Commission's definition of this doctrine is different from what most Masons think the doctrine means, and from the definition provided in Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia. The Commission said:
"There can be no question about Exclusive Jurisdiction. It is a basic principle that a Grand Lodge must be autonomous and have sole and undisputed authority over its constituent Lodges. This cannot be shared with any other Masonic council or power. But the question of exclusive territorial jurisdiction is not so clear cut. In some European and Latin American countries, a geographical or politically self-contained unit may be served by two or more Grand Lodges. If these Grand Lodges and hence their constituent Lodges are working in amity, and both are worthy of recognition in all other respects, this joint occupation of a country, state or political subdivision should not bar them from recognition."(31) (emphasis added)

In other words, the Commission on Information for Recognition has said that the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction means that all the Lodges chartered by a particular Grand Lodge give their loyalty only to that Grand Lodge, but there can be lodges chartered by different Grand Lodges in the same territory. There can be several Grand Lodges in a single geographic territory, all with many lodges under them, so long as each lodge gives its loyalty to only one Grand Lodges, and the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction is not violated, according to the 1975 statement by the Commission on Information for Recognition as reported and accepted by the Conference of Grand Masters of Masons in North America.

It should be noted that the Commission said this applies where Grand Lodges in the same territory are "in amity," and repeated this in 1986, saying, "The Commission recognizes that the American doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction is subject to exceptions, one of which is an agreement on the part of the Grand Lodge located in a territory that another Grand Lodge may operate within that territory."(32) In 1997, the Commission refused to recommend recognition of the new "Regular Grand Lodge of Andorra," because even though 7 lodges in Andorra formed that Grand Lodge, there are 2 Lodges in that country under the National Grand Lodge of France and 1 under the Grand Lodge of Spain. Thus, the Regular Grand Lodge of Andorra "does not 'share territorial jurisdiction by mutual consent or treaty.'" (emphasis in original)(33)

Significance of the Doctrine of Exclusive Territorial Jurisdiction and Any Changes
All of this is more than just a possibly interesting historical study. This doctrine, or what most Masons think this doctrine says, has definite effects on policies that are adopted by Grand Lodges today. Some who are opposed to recognizing Prince Hall Freemasonry sometimes say they are opposed because of the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction; because, they say, is it not possible to have more than one recognized Grand Lodge in any state. Some say this in good faith, and some might say this to hide other reasons for opposing Prince Hall recognition.
Freemasonry's ritual teaches the importance of honesty in all our dealings in the world, particularly with brother Masons. Therefore, it is important to eliminate any confusion about whether or not it is possible under Masonic law to recognize a Grand Lodge in the same state or territory as another Grand Lodge, or to accept the lodges under that Grand Lodge as being just as regular as ours. There is no question that the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction does not prevent this from happening, and there is nothing at all improper or irregular in those Grand Lodges in states and countries that have recognized Prince Hall or other Grand Lodges in the same places where other recognized Grand Lodges exist.

There is also nothing in the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction that would in any way hinder the Grand Lodge of any state in the United States from, for example, recognizing the Grand Lodge of France at the same time that the National Grand Lodge of France is also recognized, or from changing the situation where the United Grand Lodge of England, on the one hand, and all the United States Grand Lodges, on the other hand, recognize different Grand Lodges in Italy and Greece. Each one could recognize both of the Grand Lodges in those countries, if they wished to.

In short, decisions about which Grand Lodges to recognize should be made on the basis on which ones meet the standards established by each Grand Lodge, and not on the basis of the elusive, confusing, and often-violated doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction. In fact, it might be clearer if the doctrine were simply declared to be no longer useful or in force.(34)

Bibliography:
Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia, by Henry Wilson Coil, revised by Allen E. Roberts, published by Macoy Publishing and Masonic Supply Company, Richmond, Virginia, 1996.
Freemasonry in Virginia (1733-1936), by William Moseley Brown, published by Masonic Home Press, Inc., Richmond, 1936.
Freemasons' Guide and Compendium, by Bernard E. Jones, published by Macoy Publishing and Masonic Supply Company, New York, 1950.
Grand Lodge Recognition: A Symposium on the Conditions of Grand Lodge Recognition, compiled and published by the Commission on Information for Recognition of the Conference of Grand Masters of Masons in North America, published by Macoy Publishing and Masonic Supply Company, New York, 1956.
History of Freemasonry in Maryland, by Edward T. Schultz, published in Baltimore, 1884.
Information for Recognition: Reports on Grand Lodges in Other Lands, edited by Thomas S. Roy, prepared by the Commission on Information for Recognition of the Conference of Grand Masters of Masons in North America, published by Macoy Publishing and Masonic Supply Company, New York, 1958.
List of Lodges - Masonic, published by Pentagraph Publishers, Bloomington, Illinois, each year.
Mackey's Revised Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, by Albert G. Mackey, revised and enlarged by Robert I. Clegg, with supplemental volume by H.L. Haywood, published by Macoy Publishing and Masonic Supply Co., Inc., New York, 1946.
Masonic Addresses and Writings of Roscoe Pound, published by Macoy Publishing and Masonic Supply Company, New York, 1953.
Proceedings of Grand Lodges in the United States, for Masonic jurisdictions and for years cited in this article.
Recognition Lists of World Grand Lodges, edited by Thomas S. Roy, prepared by the Commission on Information for Recognition of the Conference of Grand
Masters of Masons in North America, 1960.
Regular, Irregular and Clandestine Grand Lodges: A Study in Foreign Recognitions, by Ray V. Denslow, published by The Masonic Service Association, Washington, DC, 1956.
Regularity of Origin: A Study of Masonic Precedents, by Christopher Haffner, published by the Paul Chater Lodge of Installed Masters No. 5391 EC and Lodge
Cosmopolitan No. 428 SC, Hong Kong, 1986.
"Reports of the Commission on Information for Recognition" of the Conferences of Grand Masters of Masons in North America, annual reports, for the years cited in this article.
"The American Doctrine: A Concept Under Siege," by Stewart W. Miner, in 1992 Transactions of Virginia Research Lodge No. 1777, at pages 11-25.

The Lodge of Washington: A History of the Alexandria Washington Lodge, No. 22, A.F. and A.M. of Alexandria, VA., 1783-1876, by F.L. Brockett, published by G.H. Ramey & Son, Publishers, Alexandria, VA., 1899.
"The Regular Freemason: A Short History of Masonic Regularity," by Michel Brodsky, in Ars Quatuor Coronatorum: Transactions of Quatuor Coronati Lodge No. 2076, volume 106 for the year 1993, published 1994, page 103.

Notes
1. The author of this article is a lawyer in the Washington DC area, and is also the librarian of the George Washington Masonic National Memorial and Secretary of the Masonic Library and Museum Association. He is the Executive Secretary of the Masonic Leadership Center, founded by Allen E. Roberts.
2. See 1996 List of Lodges - Masonic, at pages 235-240.
3. 1996 List of Lodges - Masonic, published by Pentagraph, Bloomington, Illinois, at page 37. Also see Massachusetts Grand Lodge Proceedings for 1995, at pages 31-32.
4. See 1996 List of Lodges - Masonic, published by Pentagraph, Bloomington, Illinois, at pages 297-300, and at page 262.
5. 1996 List of Lodges - Masonic, published by Pentagraph, Bloomington, Illinois, at pages 36-37.
6. Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia, at pages 36-37.
7. Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia, at page 36.
8. Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia, at page 36; and "The American Doctrine: A Concept Under Siege," by Stewart W. Miner, in the 1992 Transactions of the Virginia Research Lodge No. 1777, pages 11-25.
9. Freemasonry in Virginia, at pages 66-75; and The Lodge of Washington, at pages 17-19.
10. The Lodge of Washington, at page 20.
11. The Lodge of Washington, at pages 24-25.
12. Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia, at page 36.
13. Freemasonry in Virginia, at pages 77-80.
14. History of Freemasonry in Maryland, at pages 175-176.
15. Freemasonry in Virginia, at pages 80-82.
16. Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia, at page 269.
17. Oregon Grand Lodge Proceedings for 1993 or 1994, at pages xxx.
18. See Recognition Lists of World Grand Lodges, pages 2-59. Also see Conference of Grand Masters of North America 1957, page 60; and Conference of Grand Masters of North America 1964, page 39.
19. Regularity of Origin, page 79.
20. See 1996 List of Lodges - Masonic, published by Pentagraph, Bloomington, Illinois, at page 59.
21. See 1996 List of Lodges - Masonic, published by Pentagraph, Bloomington, Illinois, at pages 18 and 114-116.
22. See Connecticut Grand Lodge Proceedings for 1990, at pages 27-31 and 128-129.
23. For a complete list of Grand Lodges that have recognized Prince Hall Masonry, including dates of taking action and citations to their Proceedings for details, see the "Prince Hall Recognition" page on the Internet, at http://bessel.org/pha.htm. The Masonic Service Association of North America also issues periodic reports of Grand Lodges that have recognized Prince Hall Masonry.
24. Oregon Grand Lodge Proceedings 1997, pages 133-134.
25. Michigan Grand Lodge Proceedings 1995, pages 235-236.
26. "The American Doctrine: A Concept Under Siege," by Stewart W. Miner, in the 1992 Transactions of the Virginia Research Lodge No. 1777, pages 11-25.
27. Grand Lodge Recognition, pages ix-xiii.
28. Conference of Grand Masters of Masons in North America 1991, Report of the Commission on Information for Recognition, at page 78.
29. For example, the New York Grand Lodge Proceedings for 1995 say, at page 198: "The Grand Lodge of Greece is still recognized by New York and the Conference of Grand Masters of North America...."(30)
30. New York Proceedings 1995, page 198.
31. Conference of Grand Masters of North America, 1975, Report of the Commission on Information for Recognition, page 142.
32. Conference of Grand Masters of North America, 1986, Report of the
Commission on Information for Recognition, page 38.
33. 1997 Annual Report of the Commission on Information for Recognition of the Conference of the Grand Masters of Masons in North America, at page 4.
34. There are other difficulties caused by the existence of the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction. For example, a man who lives in New Jersey might petition to join a Masonic Lodge in, for example, the District of Columbia, because he often travels there on business, or is planning to move there, or feels a closeness to the member of that lodge. However, New Jersey is said to "own" him by having exclusive jurisdiction over all men in its territory, so the Secretary of the DC lodge has to write to the Grand Secretary of DC, who writes to the Grand Secretary of New Jersey, who writes to the Secretary of the Lodge located near where the man lives in New Jersey, asking if that lodge will give up its "jurisdiction" over this man. If the lodge says it will not, then the man cannot become a Mason unless he joins the lodge that refused to allow him to join the lodge he wanted to join. If the lodge says it will give permission, then New Jersey is said to "waive" its jurisdiction and permit the lodge in DC to vote on whether it will accept him. Waivers of jurisdiction are almost always granted, but the process takes months or years, and often men lose their desire to join any Masonic lodge in the process. At best, this results in useless paperwork and delay. At worst, it convinces more people that Freemasonry is a relic of the past, tying itself up in bureaucracy for no reason, and, most importantly, more concerned with satisfying the territorial desires of some people than in promoting the freedom of each person to decide which lodge he wants to petition to join, and of each lodge to vote on whomever it wishes to have join it. (Some might say that this system allows local people who know the man in, for example, New Jersey, to alert the lodge in, for example, DC, that this man would not make a good Mason. However, in the modern world there is little or no likelihood that local people will know a man any better than those living in another state, and in any case, if the DC lodge, in this example, wanted the benefit of advice from the New Jersey lodge, it could request their advice without being required to apply for a waiver of jurisdiction.

22. Re: Edict No. 232-A

2007-03-15T09:27:00.000+08:00

GLP Edict No. 232 & 232-A

September 12, 2006

TO ALL PHILIPPINE MASTER MASONS
WHITHERSOEVER DISPERSED:

Re: Edict No. 232-A of GM Romeo A. Yu

Dear Brethren:

By this time, you may have already heard that last Sunday, September 10, 2006, several Lodges from Cavite, Philippines, declared their independence from the Grand Lodge of the Philippines (GLP) and formed the Independent Grand Lodge of the Philippine Islands (IGLPI), at Aguinaldo Shrine, Kawit, Cavite.

This morning, I was furnished a copy of Edict 232-A dated September 11, 2006, issued by MW Romeo A. Yu, Grand Master of the GLP, “declaring as irregular and clandestine the Independent Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the Philippine Islands and all its members as clandestine masons”. GM Yu premised the edict on his view that “the formation of the IGLPI, within the territorial jurisdiction of the GLP, which comprises the territory of the Philippines, South Korea, the Marianas Islands, the Marshall Islands, the Ryuku Islands, South Vietnam and its existing Lodges in Japan, makes the IGLPI an irregular grand lodge and its members as irregular and clandestine masons”.

We also know that Edict 232-A was preceded by Edict No. 232 issued September 7, 2006, declaring 29 members of Pilar Lodge No. 15 as clandestine masons, for adopting a resolution manifesting their intention to declare independence from the GLP and to join other Lodges in forming a new Grand Lodge outside its auspices. While I am not at all bothered by said edicts, having expected them considering the temperament of the incumbent Grand Master, I cannot help but make known my reactions and, in any way, help prevent the GLP from committing the same mistakes.

Firstly, the IGLPI is not and cannot correctly be declared “irregular and clandestine”. The forming of a Grand Lodge is an inherent right of a Lodge and there is no need to consult anyone on this point. All the Grand Lodges in the civilized world have been formed by independent action. (Please see minutes of the proceedings on the formation of the Grand Lodge of South Australia.) Even the GLP invoked this time-honored principle when it was organized. This is apparent from the Joint Resolution of Manila Lodge 342, Cavite Lodge No. 350 and Corregidor Lodge No. 386 dated November 17, 1912, which reads it part that

“ . . . it is the inherent prerogative of any three subordinate Masonic Lodges in a territory, like the Philippines, masonically free, to organize through their representatives, a Grand Lodge”. Furthermore, the Basic Principles of Recognition, found on page 240 of the GLP Constitution, 2005 Edition, clearly provides that a Grand Lodge has regularity of origin when it is established either by a Grand Lodge or BY AT LEAST THREE SUBORDINATE LODGES. Considering that the IGLPI was established by seven (7) subordinate Lodges, it indisputably has regularity of origin.”

Secondly, GM Yu’s view that since the territorial jurisdiction of the GLP “comprises the territory of the Philippines, South Korea, the Marianas Islands, the Marshall Islands, the Ryuku Islands, South Vietnam and its existing Lodges in Japan”, no other Grand Lodge could be formed therein and any Grand Lodge so created would thus be “an irregular grand lodge and its members irregular or clandestine masons”, is ERRONEOUS. The rule on this matter is:

"There can be no question about Exclusive Jurisdiction. It is a basic principle that a Grand Lodge must be autonomous and have sole and undisputed authority over its constituent Lodges. This cannot be shared with any other Masonic council or power. But the question of exclusive territorial jurisdiction is not so clear cut. In some European and Latin American countries, a geographical or politically self-contained unit may be served by two or more Grand Lodges. If these Grand Lodges and hence their constituent Lodges are working in amity, and both are worthy of recognition in all other respects, this joint occupation of a country, state or political subdivision should not bar them from recognition.

“In other words, the Commission on Information for Recognition has said that the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction means that all the Lodges chartered by a particular Grand Lodge give their loyalty only to that Grand Lodge, but there can be lodges chartered by different Grand Lodges in the same territory. There can be several Grand Lodges in a single geographic territory, all with many lodges under them, so long as each lodge gives its loyalty to only one Grand Lodges, and the doctrine of exclusive territorial jurisdiction is not violated, according to the 1975 statement by the Commission on Information for Recognition as reported and accepted by the Conference of Grand Masters of Masons in North America.” (Taken from The Doctrine of Exclusive Territorial Jurisdiction, Paul M. Bessel, December 28, 1998.).

Likewise, this principle is adopted in the Philippines way back in 1932, as provided in Basic Principles on Recognition, page 240, GLP Constitution, 2005 Edition.

Finally, the officers and members of IGLPI are not and cannot be declared clandestine masons. A clandestine mason is “one made in or affiliated with a clandestine Lodge”, while a clandestine lodge is “a body of Freemasons or of those improperly claiming to be Freemasons, uniting in a Lodge without the consent of a Grand Lodge, or, although originally legally constituted, continuing to work after its Charter has been revoked”. (Please see Mackey, Encyclopedia on Freemasonry.) We were all initiated, passed, and raised in just and regularly constituted Lodges. Many of us belong to century-old Lodges whose Charters were issued by Gran Oriente Espanol or Grand Lodge of California, re-chartered by the Grand Lodge of the Philippines, and now by the Independent Grand Lodge of the Philippine Islands. OUR CHARTERS HAVE NEVER BEEN REVOKED AND OUR LODGES HAVE NEVER BEEN DISSOLVED.

I believe that we were declared “clandestine masons” not because we are such, but in order to summarily expel us from the GLP without the benefit of charges and trial, as provided under Part II – Ordinances, Article XVIII, of the GLP Constitution. The personality of our Lodges is separate and distinct from that of its individual members. “Once a Mason, always a Mason”, we always say. When our respective Lodges left the GLP, we become unaffiliated masons of the GLP, with right to affiliate with any of its subordinate Lodges, if we still desire to continue our membership with said Grand Lodge. Thus, we know of many Masons who belong to several Grand Lodges.

We are not cowed by the aforesaid edicts. On the contrary, we get stronger by every provocation. We however pity the present dispensation of the GLP for issuing proclamations which are not thoroughly studied and could inadvertently show their ignorance of basic jurisprudence. Any embarrassment to the GLP is also my embarrassment because, after all, the GLP is and will always be my Mother Grand Lodge. I am further comforted by the thought that our purposes are sublime and that we all act only with good conscience. We are encouraged by verse “DO NOT BE AFRAID” which appears 365 times in the Holy Bible - - enough assurance from God that for each day of the year, we can trust in the Great Architect of the Universe.

Please wish us well and pray for the success of our endeavors. We are only doing what we think is best to improve, if not save, the Craft in our beloved country.

Fraternally yours,

Bro. Joseph A. Capuyan

21. A Message from GM

2007-03-15T09:25:00.000+08:00

IGLPI Declaration of Independence

SEPTEMBER 11, 2006 EMAIL

Dear Brothers in Freemasonry ,

Fraternal Greetings to all and those who may read this and to those you may wish to pass this on. Yesterday afternoon The Most Worshipful Independent Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the Philippine Islands ( IGLPI ) based in Cavite was formally organized and constituted. Initially seven (7) century old and old Lodges, some antedating the GLP, formally declared their INDEPENDENCE from the GLP and united to form the new Grand Lodge asserting their time immemorial inherent rights to form Grand Lodges without the need of approval from any Grand Lodge for reasons and justifications emanating from past and recent events affecting the Lodges and the District.The members of the affiliated Lodges together with brother Masons from other Lodges joined in a parade from vicinity Josephines Resort to the President General Bro Emilio Aguinaldo Shrine in historic Kawit, Cavite where the ceremonies were held.The program included an Invocation, National Anthem, Pledge to the Flag, Opening and Welcome Remarks, Reading of the Declaration of Independence, Turn-in of Old Charters, Lowering of the Lodge Standards, Oath Taking of the Interim Grand Lodge Officers, Constitution Ceremonies of the New Grand Lodge, Presentation of New Charters to the 7 Lodges, Presentation of the New Grand Lodge Seal, Inaugural Address of the Grand Master, Keynote Speech of the Guest, Singing of the new Grand Lodge song.

We had a new Constitution, a seal, a song, a set of officers. The Charters are beautifully printed. The seal very symbolic with the tenets in tagalog - Kapatiran, Kalinga, Katotohanan ( KKK). Our theme is " A Fresh Start for True Masonry"

All duly made MM in a legally constituted Lodge obligating before the altar where the VSL is with the Graet and Lesser lights should be proud of brothers progressing in Masonry. Regardless of origin, creed, color, religion etc, we are all BROTHERS.

When we assembled to petition to be constituted in a GRAND LODGE ACCORDING TO OUR FREE WILL, we also exercise our time immemorial inherent right for our Lodge to join other Lodges to form a new Grand Lodge on our own FREE WILL , WITHOUT SANCTIONS.and without NEED of APPROVAL of the previous Grand Lodge.

The past weeks and days, as the D-Day was approaching , there were many efforts; tame, intimidating, threatening at each Lodge to dissuade them from forming a new Grand Lodge.The PGMs were all over us persuasively. From suspensions to expulsions, to declaring clandestine; to offers of positions, to filing of charges, The Grand Master Yu wielded all his absolute powers, against normal judicial process, to effect discipline and impose obedience. Last July the Board of General Purposes visited Cavite and talked with the WMs and me and asked for time and patience to find solutions to the problems.We have not heard from the Board. The problem is too deep, not an inch to bulged, reason for reason, principles fpr principles, morals to morals. But the empowering ABSOLUTE POWERS beyond question or constitutional boundaries are too enormous and weilded to Cavite. We thought the age of Dictators whom the Masons fought yesterday are gone. We cannot prolong our stay in GLP where all the powers are vested in the GM alone. The DGM, GSW and GJW are powerless. Our efforts for reconsiderations, our resolutions for trials and justice, our resolutions for reforms did not deserve any action or reply. Punishment was swift.From the past to the present to the future, we forsee little or no hopes for TRUE MASONRY to thrive. We have to craft our own Constitution to surgically excise the errors of the past.We had to leave but are not allowed to leave safely not even a safe conduct pass.

We will send soonest copies of our Declaration of Independece and our democratic Constitution. To the GLP please give us a warm and brotherly departure to carve our history. We are Masons forever, a Brother, a friend to all. To those belonging to another Grand Jurisdiction, we are not clandestine.

Please find our attach Circulars as reference to know us and our first judicial acts to correct a mistake.

Please pass to Cavite Masons particularly to those whose Lodge are now affiliated with us.We will respect present member status.Thank you very much.

Fraternally yours,

Jaime V Bantolo
Grand Master

20. Issues and Concerns NR. 6

2007-03-15T09:21:00.000+08:00

Cavite Lodge No. 2 Resolution
Bagong Ilaw Lodge No. 97 Resolution No. 2
Pilar Lodge No. 15 Resolution

ISSUES AND CONCERNS OF MASONIC DISTRICT NR 2 PROVINCE OF CAVITE SERIES NR 6

1. What is a Grand Lodge ?

“The Grand Lodge shall be composed of the Past Masters, the incumbent
Masters and Wardens of all its subordinate lodges, any Past Master of any Lodge of another Grand Jurisdiction who is a resident of the Philippines and a member of a subordinate Lodge, and those who have been granted honorary membership or honorary Grand Titles. “.

2.. What is the PREAMBLE of our Grand Lodge Constitution ? Ano ba ang mithiin ng mga miembro kaya sila sumapi sa samahang ito ?

“ We , the Members… invoking the aid of the Grand Architect of the Universe… in order to form a Grand Lodge …, set forth and exemplify the tenets and teachings of Freemasonry, promote LOVE, foster BROTHERHOOD, and enhance HARMONY among Masons and men, enhance the WELFARE of our Order, and preserve LIBERTY, EQUALITY, and FRATERNITY…..”

3. What is the General Power and Authority of the Grand Lodge ?

“The MW Grand Lodge of F@AM of the Philippines is the Supreme Masonic Power and Authority within its Grand Jurisdiction possessing all The attributes of sovereignty and government- Legislative, Executive and Judicial- LIMITED ONLY by a STRICT ADHERENCE to the LANDMARKS of the Order and to its own CONSTITUTION, UNIFORM CODE of BY-
“LAWS for SUBORDINATE LODGES, EDICTS and General Regulations…” “ All actions of the Grand Lodge are FINAL and IMMEDIATELY EXECUTORY..”

4. What is the General Power and Authority of the Grand Master ?

The Grand Master, BETWEEN ANNUAL COMMUNICATIONS of the Grand Lodge, MAY EXERCISE ALL its EXECUTIVE POWERS except the granting of Charters, all its Judicial powers, and such LEGISLATIVE POWERS as may provide needed legislation that shall be HARMONIOUSLY COMPLEMENTARY TO THE CONSTITUTION.. - His actions are EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY.’

5.. What is the APPOINTING POWER of the Grand Master ?

“ ALL other Grand Lodge officers shall be APPOINTED by the Grand Master
IMMEDIATELY after his election at each Annual Communication. They shall be INSTALLED before the close thereof and shall hold office at his will and pleasure….” This is an exercise of executive power.

6.. Is the power and authority of the Grand Master ABSOLUTE ?

- It APPEARS so . But at a Closer scrutiny it is SUBJECT TO. :
-- LIMITED ONLY by a STRICT ADHERENCE to the LANDMARKS OF THE ORDER, AND TO ITS OWN Constitution, Uniform Code of By-Laws for Subordinate Lodges, Edicts and General Constitution;
--The legislations shall be HARMONIOUSLY COMPLEMENTARY to the Constitution; Even the DECISION of the ELECOM on matters related to the exercise of its powers and functions shall be FINAL and IMMEDIATELY EXECUTORY and NON-APPEALABLE to the Grand Lodge or the Grand Master. During the ANCOM, when the Grand Master submits his Grand Master Report, the Grand Lodge CAN DISAPPROVE his acts or any of his acts.

7. How about the appointment of the Junior Grand Lecturer ?

-The Constitution provides that “ There shall be one (1) Junior Grand Lecturer appointed by the Grand Master for each of the following regions :

g. Cavite - Masonic District No 2 h. Laguna, Quezon, Batangas, Mindoro Masonic District No 6, 8, 10, 52…..”

8. How about the recent EDICT No ----- dated,----- subject-----------------------
Does it VIOLATE the Constitution ?

- The Edict APPOINTED VW Edgardo Lupisan as JGL for Cavite, Laguna, Quezon, Batangas and Mindoro.as an exercise of executive powers.

- The Edict, as an exercise of Legislative powers, MERGED the two (2) REGIONs and REDUCED the Number of Regions CONTRARY to the Constitutional provision.

- The EDICT No ----- VIOLATES the Constitution. It AMENDED the Constitution provisions DISREGARDING the PROPER PROCEDURES OF AMENDING THE CONSTITUTION.

- The Edict as an exercise of Legislative Powers DID NOT HARMONIOUSLY COMPLEMENT THE CONSTITUTION BUT AMENDED IT CONTRARY TO PROPER PROCEDURES.

More so the Premises of the Edict indicates that it ACCUSES past administrations, as despite of increases in the number of JGL or DGLs the end result is a “DETERIORATING PROFICIENCY “

9. How about the Edict No ------- dated ------- subject ------------------------
Does it VIOLATE the Constitution ?

The EDICT RENUMBERED ALL THE DISTRICT AND THEN APPOINTED THE DDGMs of such renumbered District .

In the exercise of Legislatice Powers, the GM RENUMBERED the District which is CONTRARY to the Constitution provisions as it DID NOT undergo the process of amending the Constitution provision .

It made a Premise that the LATE MW Raynold Fajardo PGM, PGS recommended such changes to coincide with the national regional numbering and eliminate CONFUSION. RECORD showed that such alleged proposal was NOT passed on to the Committee on Revision of the Constitution for MY 2005-2006.

We had been numbered District 10, thence District 2, and now District 4A. We had made Resolution in the past to go back to District 10.Ours is a Masonically UNIQUE numbering system. LIONS Clubs or Rotarys or K of C are NOT numbered like the RP national regions.

10.. Ano naman ang Batas ng Distrito ?

- The UNIFORM CODE OF BY-LAWS OF THE DISTRICT is covered by EDICT 127 CHOA series of 1990. By virtue of this, the District formulated and updated its District Constitution and By-Laws last 2003 under VW Rolly Sarmiento, PDDGM. The Edict 127 is part of the Constitution. The District Constitution is also a Basis for which we act and govern ourselves. The District Constitution also undergoes the proper procedure of formulation, adoption and approval by the District Convention ; and further forwarded to the Grand Lodge or Grand Master for approval, or information .

11 Ano ang mga IMPORTANTENG provision ng ating District Constitution ?

- Hosting of the Annual District Convention shall be ROTATED among the Lodges in the SEQUENCE of their Lodge numbers.

- Two (2) Lodges may SWAP their Hosting in a written agreement with due Notice to the DDGM

-- Nominees for DDGMs shall COME from among the Past Masters BELONGING TO THE BLUE LODGE WHICH SHALL HOST THE DISTRICT CONVENTION;

-- DGLs MUST HAVE FINISHED A Masonic Education seminar, previously served as GLI, MUST COME from a Lodge which in the previous two (2) years DO NOT HAVE A DGL;

DGLs must have been a PM for at least three (3) years

19. News Bulletin NR 11

2007-03-15T09:18:00.000+08:00

KKK NEWS BULLETTIN NR 11

1. NOMINATIONS FOR DDGM during the term of MW Franklin J. Demonteverde . The GM issued CIRCULAR no 15 which states that “ All nominations for DDGM must be submitted to the Grand Lodge not later than November 30, 1999. Thus the Deputy Grand Master will have enough time to evaluate the qualifications of nominees for the position of DDGM for the coming Masonic year “…See how serious they were in EVALUATING THE QUALIFICATIONS OF NOMINEES FOR DDGM !!!!

2. IN September 16-17, 1994, when then VW Romeo A Yu was the JGL for South Mindanao, during the 12th Southeastyern Mindanao Multi-District
Convention, with MW Pablo C Ko Jr as Grand Master, the District No 37 with VW Nestor C Panlaque Sr as DDGM, presented a RESOLUTION suggesting to the Grand Lodge that the APPOINTMENT of DDGM be limited to the three names NOMINATED and submitted by the Districts concerned for the reasons that the Nominees are the MOST ACCEPTABLE and QUALIFIED; that the general members in the district fully appreciate the CAPABILITIES and QUALIFICATIONS of the NOMINEES, that there will be MUTUAL COOPERATION EXPECTED between the Grand Lodge and the District. The Resolution was approved in the Convention. We do not know its fate in the ANCOM. Perhaps the new GM would be reminded of this. PERHAPS

3. On the GM’s INSTALLATION OBLIGATION and CHARGE… I.O. – Do you agree that ALL POWERS with which you are about to be INVESTED are GIVEN YOU by your BRETHREN SOLELY for the PROTECTION and IMPROVEMENT of Freemasonry ?…; Do you promise NEVER to be ARBITRARY or DISCOURTEOUS, but to DECIDE JUSTLY and IMPARTIALLY, to labor diligently to MAINTAIN PEACE and HARMONY among the brethren, to SPREAD BROTHERLY LOVE and AFFECTION and ever to remember that you are but first among your peers? … Most Worshipful, the progress and WELFARE of Freemasonry within our jurisdiction during the ensuing year will materially DEPEND UPON YOU and the OFFICERS CHOSEN to serve with you. You will remember that only out of the FITNESS TO GOVERN ARISES THE RIGHT TO RULE….. Do you still remember ????

4. For the first time, the District of Cavite RIV-A, was tasked to join the Multi-District Convention of Southern Tagalog region Districts in Tayabas, Quezon. A few WMs attended. The Masonic Education dwelled more on the legality of appointing the District officers. Perhaps it refers to the appointing authority of the GM. The more important expectations of the Brethren is that the person appointed is QUALIFIED, ACCEPTED by the Brethrens, WORTHY, PREPARED, PROPERLY VOUCHED FOR in the District Convention. What was the

5.INTENTION of the RULE on appointment of DDGM ? ….. Another LONG DEBATE !!!! Also WHAT was the intention of the District in agreeing to a COVENANT on Rotation Policy of Hosting and the DDGM comes from the Host Lodge ??? Another debate ??? And what is the END/ the GOAL? , the PURPOSE ? ------- HARMONY !!!! - the CHARGE to the GM !!!

August 23, 2006…JVB….KKK CONVENOR

18. Caucus in Batangas City

2007-03-15T08:24:00.000+08:00

La Naval Lodge No. 269 Resolution 03-06

Bagong Buhay Lodge No. 17 Resolution No. 02

AUGUST 18, 2006
CAUCUS IN BATANGAS CITY

GLP GM Yu asked for a caucus with the Brethren of Batangas on this date. GM Yu was accompanied by Grand Secretary MW Danilo Angeles and JGW RW Peter Lim Lo Soy. Despite the arrival of GM Yu and party over 3 hours late of the schedule, the Batangas brethren waited. Before the “caucus” started, the Grand Secretary laid down the “Masonic Protocol” that once the Grand Master speaks no one else can speak. Questions were raised why was it then called a “caucus” if there will be no inter action between the Grand Master and the brethren. The “Masonic Protocal” prevailed and it was the Grand Secretary who answered questions. The “caucus” ended with the Batangas brethren disatistfied with answers to their questions and how the “caucus” was conducted.

17. News Bulletin NR 10

2007-03-15T08:23:00.000+08:00

KKK NEWS BULLETIN NR 10

1 BATAAN NEWS !!! The DDGM of Bataan who was NOT NOMINATED by the District but was appointed by the GM is NOT accepted by three (3) Lodges thereat and could NOT ENTER their Lodges. The appointed DGLs and GLIs also DECLINED their appointment as per info. PERO HINDI SIYA NAGSUSUMBONG tulad sa CAVITE. . HINDI rin siya NAGPUPUMILIT na TANGGAPIN di tulad sa CAVITE. WALANG DGL or GLI doon.

2. WALA PA RIN SAGOT ??? Bakit kaya ??? After submitting RESOLUTIONS and Letters of CONSIDERATIONS to the GLP, WALA pa ring FEEDBACK. GANOON ba talaga KABAGAL ang HUSTISYA ??? Mayroon pa bang MASONIC JUSTICE para sa mga nasuspended na WMs. LUMABAS na ang CIRCULART 12 at KALAT na ang SUSPENSION news sa buong kapuluan. . Kaya pala tawag sila kung BAKIT ? DAHIL MALABO ang EXPLANATIONS sa CIRCULAR… WALANG SPECIFICS !!!

3. PIPITO na lang ang LAMAN ng LOYA na DINADALAW ni DDGM. TAMA lang para magmeet. Paglabas ng ISA, MAG CLOSE na sila.

4. WALANG QUORUM daw and District 4A Meeting basi sa District Constitution. DINUDOCTOR na naman !!!! ANO? Para masabi na marami silang umatend ??? Talaga??? Eh bakit sila approve ng resolutions? At decision ? MALI .

5. KK KATAGALUGAN under Convenor VWB Ben Apacible meet at Cavite City hosted by KKK last August 10. It was attended by more than 150 representatives from Cavite, Batangas, Laguna, Bataan, Zambales, Olongapo City, Bulacan, Pampanga, Tarlac, NCR and Cagayan. Absent were delegates from Nueva Ecija, Isabela, Quirino. Representatives from UGLP based in Tacloban City also attended. There were scholarly professional presentation of QUESTIONS and ANSWERS on the Grand Lodge System; How to Form a Grand Lodge, Basis and Modes of Recognition of a Grand Lodge, the UGLP Model. It was an eye opener to many delegates. Now they can expertly explain how to organize a new Grand Lodge. The bigger question again is WHEN WILL the NEW GRAND LODGES BE FORMED ??? ABANGAN !!! ABANGAN!!! ABANGAN!!! Ang susunod na kabanata ????

6. What many learned is that : YOU DON”T HAVE TO ASK PERMISSION FROM THE PRESENT GRAND LODGE IN ORDER TO FORM A NEW GRAND LODGE…. IT TAKES ONLY THREE (3) LODGES TO FORM A NEW GRAND LODGE… YOU ARE NOT CONSIDERED CLANDESTINE AS MASONIC MORALS AND TEACHINGS SAYS… AYAW LANG NILANG MASIRA ANG KANILANG IMAGE O PRESTIGE NA MABAWASAN NG MEMBERS AT DUES AT MASABING MAY MALAKING PROBLEMA SILA SA LEADERSHIP MAN O MANAGEMENT

7. NAISUMBONG NA SA GM SA GLP AND PANANADYAK NG REPORTER NI DDGM P/SUPT MARIO G MARASIGAN. .. subalit wala pang discipilinary action o Masonic expeditious justice na ginagawa si GM… BAKIT KAYA ????…. NAPAPAHIYA ba SILA ??? KASI ALTER EGO daw niya !!!!

August 14, 2006…. JVB…. KKK

16. News Bulletin NR 09

2007-03-15T08:20:00.000+08:00

KKK NEWS BULLETIN NR 09

1. NEWS FLASH !!! More on SUSPENSIONS !!! Asked if he was HAPPY about the SUSPENSION of three (3) WMs in the District, DDGM Marasigan shrugged and says si GM ang nagsuspend. Only to received a revelation that DDGM Marasigan RECOMMENDED for DISCIPLINARY ACTION. There were rumors that SUSPENSION ORDERS are also forthcoming or awaiting action for the Lodge TYLERS and one more Lodge WM. .. The Lodge WMs were ELECTED by the Brethrens are now DEPRIVED of the GOOD LABORS of these fine WMs.

2. PROTEST ! CONDEMNATION ! RESOLUTIONS! - Affected Lodges recently met and discussed the appropriate courses of action on the Suspension Orders. The recommendations were tame and extreme. Resolutions were made and sent to the GLP protesting the Masonic INJUSTICE done to the WMs and to the Lodge; to the GRAVE ABUSE of POWERS ; to USURPATION of POWERS by the DDGM and JGL.

3.BIG DEBATE !!! Perhaps the learned will react. There is indeed a BIG DEBATE over the POWERS of the GM on his exercise of POWERS “ To SUSPEND the WM or officers of the Lodge “ WITHOUT ANY

4.QUALIFICATION on WHAT GROUNDS? UNDER WHAT RULES ? UNDER WHAT PROCESS ? WHO IS CHARGING ? WHO IS HEARING THE CASE ?……. WMs have the POWER “ to SUSPEND any officer for IRREGULARITY or DISOBEDIENCE “ properly qualified. …. The GM pala CAN SUSPEND the WM for ANY REASON as an EXPRESSION of his ABSOLUTE POWERs even OVER THE CONSTITUTION.? TSK? TSK? TSK?

5. ANOTHER BIG DEBATE !!!. The RIGHT TO VISIT IS NOT ABSOLUTE but is IMPAIRED by the POWERS of the WM to REFUSE ADMISSION; and can ORDER a MEMBER/NONMEMBER TO LEAVE the lodge; by the POWERS and DUTIES of the TYLER also to REFUSE ADMISSION ; by the FIRST DUTY of the WMs to MAINTAIN HARMONY and PEACE inside the LODGE…… VERSUS the DUTY of the DDGM or District Officers to VISIT the Lodge…… This is the FIRST ISSUE--- the ENTRY into the LODGE As soon as PERMISSION is GRANTED; the SECOND ISSUE is the proper RITUAL of RECEPTION. Or the DUTY of the Lodge to RECEIVE the Dignitaries.

6. According to the Edicts and Constitution, the GLIs must be INSTALLED NOT LATER then June 30. Many Lodge HAVE NO GLI up to now.

7. A GLI was INSTALLED by a DGL reading the Rituals, last week only. The PGLO acting as MC DID NOT MAKE THE PROCLAMATION. QUESTION --- IS the GLI DULY INSTALLED ??? DETERIORATING PROFICIENCY daw ??? Lapses kuno!

8. FLASH !!! Asian Times Journal July 31-Aug 06, 2006 issue HEADLINE back page “ BIKTIMA NG PANGGUGULPI , REPORTER TINADYAKAN NG HEPE NG SILANG-PNP ‘ Si P/Supt Mario G Marasigan po and HEPE ng Silang PNP.

Siya rin po ang DDGM ng District 4A Cavite. Sa page 4 ng editorial nakasulat din po ang HINDI NAIS nating MABASA dahil po UNMASONIC. Ano po and inyong gagawin ??? PAALALA—HINDI PO SIYA NOMINADO NG DISTRITO AS DDGM!!!!! APPOINTED SIYA NI GM AS ALTER-EGO NIYA.!!!

August 07, 2006 JVB… KKK, Updated Aug 16

15. News Bulletin NR 08

2007-03-15T08:19:00.001+08:00

KKK NEWS BULLETIN NR 08

1.An Assembly of CORE Groups of Districts from Batangas, Laguna, Cavite, Zambales, Bataan, Bulacan, Pampanga, Tarlac, Nueva Ecija South, Manila, Isabela, Quirino met last July 19, in Manila. The affair was attended by representatives from Catbalogan, Samar and Tacloban . The Convenor VWB Ben Apacible informed the group that the efforts to solicit signatures for the RESOLUTION to call for a SPECIAL ANCOM did not received the required VOTES or SIGNATURES and is therefore deemed DEAD. Explanations were given specially with the timing of the issuance of GLP Circular nr. 10 dated May 30, 2006. How soon can we settle the issue of ELECTORAL REFORMs?

2. .The Board of General Purposes chaired by PGM PUNO met last July 26 and discussed the topics on CAVITE, LEYTE/SAMAR UGLP, and issues raised by the Grand Lodge of California. Thereafter the Board decided to sit down with all the WMs of CAVITE last July 29 at the resthouse of PGM Bunda in Noveleta. 15 WMs attended as WM of Lodge 316 and 15 were not available. The WMs spoke of their Lodge situation and appreciation or thoughts on the problems in Cavite. Of course the young WMs knew but few DO NOT internalize the situation . The KKK articulated their position on Masonic Injustice to the 3 WMs, on the intimidations of the District officers, on the Covenant. The others do not mind and continue their Lodge works avoiding the politics.Others just follow the Constitution and received the DDGM. This is a subtle way of finding a HEAD COUNT and determining STRENGTH and WEAKNESSES. Of course the Board just knew the situation very recently. Perhaps there are very FEW PGMs we can TRUST to seek resolution to the problem as these few have the MORAL AUTHORITY to SPEAK and ENFORCE and INFLUENCE. They ask for TIME and PATIENCE as the BOARD can ONLY ADVICE and RECOMMEND to the GM. What if the GM REFUSE ???Let us wish them GOD’s blessing to better proper solutions done.

3. The Board of General Purposes proceeded to have coffee with VWB Bantolo who lives nearby. Honored as host, the dialogue again resurrected the issues of 2003 ELECTIONEERING; the District Covenant; the District officers selection, qualifications, appointment ( DDGM, JGL, DGL ); Masonic Injustice, police tactics ( harrashments, intimidations, coercion, arreglo, takutan, disinformation); issue on Masonic Morality VS Constitution, powers, authority; Masonic Tenets VS admission, qualifications, preparations, vouched for; GLP administration on the RODIL case in PGM Pagotan’s time; deceit and deceptions of the GM and DDGM, the Suspension Orders; ABUSE of POWER of GM and USURPATION of POWERS of DDGM / JGL; on what is KKK, on who is the Host Lodge? Legality of District Convention? On Molino Lodge institution/constitution controversies , No commitments were made as the Convenor has NO POWERS but to call and preside. The Assembly decides. The Board ask to be given the opportunity to find ways to resolve the problem and to advise the GM of the best course of action to take. I informed them that the brittle thread is nearing tearing point and the cable tow is shortening. Asked them what they will do with the
Suspension Orders? With the appointments of District Officers?, with the GM ? with the Resolutions filed since 2 years ago at the GLP? With ELECTIONEERING ? will Special ANCOM be called? Etc. I believed they have the answers. GOD bless them. Let us put our trust on PGM PUNO.We will WAIT a TIME with PATIENCE watching FIRST the SUSPENSION ORDER before the WMs Lodge Stated Meeting. From there, we will carve our path; but the planning and preparation CONTINUES…

July 31..JVB..KKK.

14. News Bulletin NR 07

2007-03-15T08:17:00.000+08:00

KKK NEWS BULLETIN NR 07

1. BAD NEWS @#@ .. ARAY!!! MASAKIT!!! WALANG HUSTISYA !!!WALANG KATARUNGAN ??? The GM issued an ORDER OF SUSPENSION from the exercise of their position the WMs Zaf Benedicto of Lodge 15 ( a century old Lodge), Rogel Syfu of Lodge 17 (another century old Lodge), and Jun Alvarez of Lodge 269 ( a son and grandson of Past Masters). An Incident Narrative Report was made on a July 01 incident at Lodge 15 when the visiting retinue of 1 DDGM, 1 JGL, 6 DGLs, 2 GLIs were advised that they CANNOT ENTER the TILED lodge as it will DISHARMONIZE and DISTURB the PEACE of the Lodge and as agreed by the members. And when they FORCED their ENTRY, the WM RECESSED the Lodge. Asked to explain within 72 hours, the WM replied by July 10; and in July 12 the SUSPENSION was given. Two other Incident Narrative Reports on a June 09 incident at Lodge 17 and a June 16 incident at Lodge 269 caused the DDGM to direct the District Chairman on Committee of Jurisprudence to posthaste ISSUE SUMMONSES to the WMs of both Lodges to appear before the Committee on July 03 and to explain their sides. Both did NOT ATTEND , but WM Syfu sent a letter reply and also questioned the credentials and authority of the Committee over the WM. On July 20 the GM issued ORDERS of SUSPENSION to both WMs. A BIG DEBATE on the authority of the WMs, on REFUSING ADMISSION, on POWERS of the TYLER, on the FIRST RULE TO MAINTAIN HARMONY in the Lodge VERSUS the LIMITED RIGHT TO VISIT and following ENTRY the DUTY to RECEPTION CEREMONIES…

2. MORE on the PGMs BUNDA/Beltran and VW Marasigan/Capuyan DIALOGUE at Heritage Hotel… They talked about PEACE first before HARMONY could be had. They talked of STOPPING the Lodge 15

Confrontation and to recall the EXPLANATION ORDER. But NOTHING HAPPENED. The Suspension Order was issued. VW Marasigan texted ALL WMs telling them of the Suspension and subtly WARNING them of any BREACH of DISCIPLINE- a nice way of INTIMIDATION to the KKK members/adherents. Hence the KKK Convenor text message on the DEATH of JUSTICE

3.The KKK Assembly Meeting of July 16, 2006 at Cavite Lodge No 2 attended by more than 100 members, 6 PDDGMs, 2 visiting PDDGMs, many VW sirs, WBs, bros. The Assembly heard the sides of WMs Benedicto, Syfu, Alvarez, WB Jarder, the incidents at Lodge 300 where the ENTRY of the DDGM was VOTED UPON by the Lodge, and other incidents of Masonic INJUSTICE led to a declaration to study, plan, prepare for the EXTREME OPTION as the Brethren finds NO MORE HOPES or NO MORE FUTURE in such an OPPRESSIVE Grand Lodge. The Assembly sought the creation of a Legal Group to assist the WMs in their cases. The Assembly will also CONTINUE to work within the bounds or limits of the Constitution in the QUEST for JUSTICE.

4. Last July 22, RW ANIAG , who attended a DeMolay Activity at Cavite Lodge No 2 sought a meeting with VWBs Capuyan, Bantolo and Ricafrente. Apparently the SGW does NOT KNOW the Cavite situation so we BRIEFED him.He promised to REFORM the systems when he SITS as GM. That’s 2 years from NOW and the problem is searching resolution NOW. We understood his POWERLESSNESS as a SGW as ONLY the GM has the POWER, the TOTAL POWER!!!. EVEN to VIOLATE the Constitution?

JULY 30, 2006… JVB …KKK…

13. News Bulletin NR 06

2007-03-15T08:16:00.000+08:00

KKK NEWS BULLETIN NR 06

NEWS FLASH !!! DGL Catubo filed a COMPLAINT against TYLER WB Rae Jarder of Lodge 269 and WM Rogel Syfu of Lodge 17 for NOT ALLOWING them ( with JGL Lupisan at Lodge 269 ) to ENTER the Lodge during the Lodge Stated Meetings in June 2006. JGL Lupisan, the Chairman, District Committee on Jurisprudence, sent SUMMONS for them to appear on July 03, 2006 at 6 pm at Lodge No 2 . WALANG DUMATING. !!! NILAMOK SILA SA PAGHIHINTAY !!! SARADO ANG LOYA !!! MADILIM !!! Baka may aberia o diperensiya ang ginagawa nila ? Mali ba o tama ang procesong ginawa nila ?

That’s what you get for a rubbish input – a rubbish output. Well sorry GM , these are the people of your UTMOST TRUST and CONFIDENCE doing you DISSERVICE as your MOST QUALIFIED ALTER-EGO KUNO !!! Heard that DGL Catubo WILL NO LONGER SERVE AS DGL of the 2 Lodges as he has LOST MORAL ASCENDANCY having FILED the COMPLAINT…Papasukin kaya siya ng Loya after all these events ? SINO KAPALIT NIYA ???

NEWS BREAK !!! The GM sent a letter to WM Benedicto of Lodge 15 to explain the COMPLAINT of DDGM Marasigan for REFUSING them ADMISSION in their Lodge last July Stated Meeting. Given only 72 hours to respond, the WM sent a very eloquent, substantive, scholarly reply. MALAYO , LUMA ang pasakalye ni DDGM.. WM pa lang ito mas marami pang alam kay JGL at DDGM at DGLs. I believe the GM would be ASTOUNDED with the DEPTH of VALID REASONING of the WM.

MORE ON LEYTE !!! The Bretheren of Leyte-Samar Region DECLARED THEIR INDEPENDENCE from the GLP and formed the UGLP with MW Eduard Chua as its FIRST GM. There were about 137 delegates from the Visayas Mindanao and Luzon who attended the occasion. A REAL BREAKTHROUGH. There had been various attempts in the past to create the Grand Lodge of Mindanao but were thwarted by the Committee on Resolution as it will DISMEMBER the GLP . Well it has started long before this august event. All you have to do is EXAMINE OUR CONSCIENCE. SAAN KAYA TAYO NAGKAMALI !!! They ask WHEN WE WILL JOIN THEM ??? A VERY BIG QUESTION INDEED !!!

The 3rd Force of VW Ed Perez , PSGL, PDDGM met last July 9 at Lodge 69. There were about more than 30 attendees from Lodge 69, 49. Among the NEUTRAL UNCOMMITTED group finding solutions to the PROBLEM of the District CREATED by the APPOINTMENT by the GM of a DDGM OUTSIDE of the 3 Nominees WHO WERE AFFIRMED BY THE DISTRICT CONVENTION… SO WHAT IS THEIR SOLUTION to the problem ??? The meeting was GRACED by the presence of the DDGM, JGL, and DGLs. Will they ADMIT THAT THEY WERE PART OF THE PROBLEM?

FLASH !!! PGMs BUNDA and BELTRAN met with VW CAPUYAN and DDGM MARASIGAN in an attempt to seek solutions to the district problem. Such initiative is WELCOME from our PGMs .

July 12, 2006… VWB Jaime V Bantolo, PDDGM, KKK CONVENOR

12. Manifesto

2007-03-15T08:12:00.000+08:00

Subject: [glphils] RESULT OF THE GRAND ASSEMBLY OF MASTER MASONS IN TACLOBAN CITY

July 8, 2006
To: ALL MASONIC LODGESUnder the Jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge Of the Philippines

Subject: M A N I F E S T O

Dear Brethren:We humbly submit the foregoing MANIFESTO for your enlightenment and consideration and to decide what appropriate action shall be taken in relation to what has become of the governance and management of our Grand Lodge. Our fraternity, ancient as it is, is one that we can safely, and proudly, say to be a perfect organization. However, its perfection is lately tainted by the way our Grand Lodge is being managed, apparently by a clique of a few, to suit their whims and caprices.We therefore submit the following issues for you to consider and ponder upon, thus: 1. What happened to and what has been done in relation to our Acacia Fund?

2. What assistance has the Grand Lodge extended to the Blue Lodges who are in dire need of a lodge/temples for their stated meetings, activities, etc?

3. What has become of our inherent right to choose and elect the officers of the Grand Lodge?

4. What has this inefficient and ineffective administrative mechanism of the Grand Lodge done so far? The issue as to the Acacia Fund has remained unsatisfactorily answered. What really happened to our contributions? Where did our fund go and who squandered it? What has been done to recover it and what appropriate action has been taken against those responsible for the mess? To refresh our memory, most of us, if not all, were asked to give a one time payment of Php 1, 500.00. With the hope of saving the ACACIA, and consequently the fraternity in general, the brethren parted away with hard earned money with one thing in mind, to be able to extend financial assistance to the families of the brethren who unfortunately and untimely dropped their working tools. It did not work. The brethren were required to donate the one time payment, and in the name of the fraternity, was again asked to resume paying an annual regular assessment of Php 200.00. With no questions asked, many heeded the call.It did not work either, and the Insurance Commission has appointed two (2) Conservators to the ACACIA which will ultimately lead to receivership and finally liquidation. Obviously our contribution was misappropriated and the culprits are just laughing on their way to the bank. Individually, our contribution to the ACACIA Fund may be insignificant, but collectively, it is a substantial amount considering the present number of membership in our fraternity. With this situation, and knowing that not one of the culprits has been hailed to court, are we still going to continue paying the Php 200.00? If we do, is there any assurance that the contributions will not again be misappropriated? On the issue of contribution, each Lodge is required to pay an annual per capita to the Grand Lodge which is included in our dues. The query is, what assistance has the Grand Lodge extended to the brethren, especially to those Blue Lodges who have no temple to hold and conduct their stated meetings? Has the Grand Lodge taken any initiative to assist the concerned Blue Lodges in this respect? Nothing is being done on this sorry plight of the Blue Lodges. They are left to fend for their own.If we estimate the amount of per capita contribution that we annually remit, we can just imagine how huge the amount is. Is it not fair that what we contribute be given to us in return in the form of assistance especially to the Blue Lodges who have no temple of their own?

Finally, It is very disturbing that the integrity and credibility of the fraternity has been adversely affected as a consequence of the acts of a selected few. This has been apparent, from among others, during the recent Annual Communication last April 28, 2006 in the City of Cebu when during the election for the office of Junior Grand Warden, only three (3) names, as nominees, were submitted to the brethren to choose from. With only three (3) names submitted to be voted upon, the PGMs present, who were responsible for the short list of nominees, have blatantly violated their obligation taken before the altar; that is, to maintain and support the Masonic Constitution, which constitution clearly provides, under Sub-Paragraph 7, Paragraph D, Section 5 of Article 5 thereof, quoted hereunder for easy reference, thus: "On the day before the election of Junior Grand Warden, the MW Grand Master shall again call the Past Grand Masters to a meeting to make a final re-assessment of the qualifications of the seven (7) brethren previously chosen. On the basis, among others, of the comments of the brethren at large on their qualifications and programs, the Past Grand Masters shall make a final deliberation of the worthiness of the seven (7) previously chosen brethren for the position of Junior Grand Warden. The Past Grand Masters are especially enjoined to consider whether they strictly complied with our election laws, edicts, rules and regulations on the basis of best available information. The final list of brethren worthy for the position of Junior Grand Warden, which shall not be less than five (5) nor more than seven (7) shall be announced to the brethren one (1) hour before the election." Was this not unmasonic? Of course, not one of those responsible will admit the violation intentionally committed when the Masonic injunction regarding elections was disregarded and ignored, not to mention the pronouncement made by no less that the MW Grand Master himself which was similarly ignored and defied, by intentionally submitting the short lists of nominees for the brethren to elect as their Junior Grand Warden. Taking advantage of the short list submitted by the PGMs who were then present, the nominees rejoiced instead of declining the nomination, for, with the short list, their chances of winning the elections became greater, oblivious that by accepting the nomination, they have conspired in emasculating the freedom of choice of the brethren as ordained in the Constitution, unmindful of the injunction when they took the solemn obligation that they will not cheat, wrong or defraud a lodge or a brother master mason out of the value of anything which necessarily includes the freedom of choice of the brethren to select one (1) of the five (5) nominees, and not just three (3) as desired by the PGMs. Thus, with only three (3) nominees to choose from, and apparently taking advantage of it, they have therefore wronged, cheated and defrauded the Lodge and the brethren present who wanted to exercise their right to select their future leader in accordance with the Masonic Law Book. Seeking refuge to the word "WORTHY", the PGMs present, who were responsible for the short list nominees justified their action, but the justification was refused by the brethren, as clearly shown by the walk-out that ensued, a first in the history of Freemasonry in the Philippines, if we are not mistaken. The question now is, what if out of the seven (7) nominees the PGMs decide that only two (2), or worse only one (1), is worthy for the position of Junior Grand Warden? Are we still going to proceed with the election, which has been rendered moot since only one (1) has been considered WORTHY by the PGMs?Necessarily not, otherwise, the inherent right of each and every Mason to select and vote for their future leader will be put to naught. If it was to be so, the election will be left in the hands of the PGMs and that would be a mockery of the election process which is definitely not the spirit and intention of the sought after electoral reform. In the same token, the short list submitted to the ELECOM by the PGMs has rendered the election in the Annual Communication a mockery of the election process since the same has defeated the very soul of the right of the brethren to exercise their freedom of choice, the freedom, from among others, which our ancestors in the fraternity has fought and died for, thus making farce the legacy left by our brother heroes who fought tyranny and oppression only to be destroyed, ironically, within the four corners of the Grand Lodge. Adding insult to injury, instead of ADMITTING the VIOLATION committed in the last elections, a circular has been passed defending the indefensible mistake committed with the explanation that it was masonically impossible to complete the required number of nominees in accordance with the Masonic Law Book since anybody nominated at that time, as a result of the disqualification of the alleged "unworthy brothers" would violate the constitution, yet, what they did when the short list was submitted was already a violation of the Constitution. In other words, what the PGMs responsible for the short list are saying, is that they are above the Masonic Constitution and they have the right to follow or not to follow the same, depending upon their likes and dislikes, regardless of the rights of the brethren who are entitled to select their future leader. Is this the brotherly love we are taught about in the fraternity where our rights are not respected but instead, trampled upon by our very own brothers whom respect, love and honor? Of course, we are referring to those responsible for this mess and the fracas that ensued because of their unmasonic actions.The insufficient and incompetent administrative mechanism of the Grand Lodge of the Philippines has failed to address the simple needs of the brethren. It has lost sight of the fact that the palpable stability of the lodge system emanates from the power of the blue lodges and the members. Administrative requirements hardly needed were never attended to. Fiscal plans and priority in the budget were never transparent. Geographic dispersion, constrained with information incapability, resulted to imbalanced service to the deterrent of the ordinary members. Shall we perpetuate a disorganized administrative system to the disservice of the brethren? The brethren of Masonic Districts No. RVIII-B have carefully and seriously pondered well on the current events hounding the Fraternity and WE are unanimous in the resolve to be AUTONOMOUS and INDEPENDENT. Are we willing to perpetuate a disorganized system to the disservice of the brethren?
What will you do?

DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

WE, the officers and members of the Masonic Blue Lodges herein jointly assembled, do hereby DECLARE that:
Freemasonry is, and has always been, a progressive science whose growth, throughout the ages, has been borne on the wings of change. From its inception in the early 17th century, the Fraternity has spread and in the unrelenting pursuit of light, new Grand Lodges were constituted which process of continuous regeneration is the very life blood and binding force of the Craft. WE hold the following ancient Masonic landmarks as the rule and guide of the craft by which all masons must abide by and comply with: That all Freemasons are obligated only in so far as that obligation will not interfere with the duty that they owe to God, their country, their neighbors or to themselves. That the Craft is a peculiar system of morality veiled in allegory and illustrated by symbols and its aim has been, and will always be, the brotherhood of man under the fatherhood of God. And, that Grand Lodges are instituted among Freemasons and derive its just powers only from and with the consent of the governed. WE hold it to be true that all Masons are created equal, endowed with certain unalienable rights such as to assemble in lodges, elect officers to govern their affairs, make new Masons according to the ancient traditions and landmarks of the Craft, visit lodges, celebrate fellowship at festive boards and engage in all activities that traditional Lodges of Freemasonry, since time immemorial, have practiced in the pursuit of happiness. However, human frailties is the enemy of all human institutions and through the passage of time, philosophical ideals are enshrined into rigid rules and practices that eventually become destructive to the aims of the original principles upon which they are based. It is at this juncture that all institutions should be altered and NEW ONES INSTITUTED based upon the original principles and ancient landmarks of the Craft in order to effect and protect the HONOR, INTEGRITY and GENERAL WELFARE of those who are subject to them. WE acknowledge that among all human beings, Freemasons willingly capacitate themselves to practice the virtue to await a time with patience and know fully well that the change in the system of government in Freemasonry should not be enacted without due cause. But the reality and in the course of the past and present events, it has become inevitably necessary for us to dissolve the political bond which have connected us with The Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the Philippines and assume the powers of Freemasonry, that is, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and that of the Great Architect has entitled us. The geographical situation of the country hinders the efficient and regular official visitation by the Grand Lodge of subordinate lodges which is the important duty to maintain and improve harmonious relations among brethren and that management thereof has been outgrown by its present size.In the light of these due causes, WE are now compelled to assert our rights, as freemen and masons, to abolish our former system of Masonic government and institute a new one based and founded upon the original principles and ancient landmarks of the Craft. Thus, WE, the Freemasons herein jointly assembled hereby do ordain and unanimously declare our independence and institute and constitute THE MOST WORSHIPFUL UNITED GRAND LODGE OF FREE AND ACCEPTED MASONS OF PHILIPPINES.Done in the City of Tacloban, Leyte , Philippines, in the 8 th day of the month of July, in the year of our Lord 2006.

11. Resolution No. RVIIIA-2

2007-03-15T08:10:00.000+08:00

Resolution No. RVIIIA-2, 2006

Resolution Expressing Support
To the Manifesto Calling for Autonomy
By the Brethren of Masonic District No. RVIII-B (18)

Whereas, brethren of the District received a Manifesto from the officers and members of Masonic District No. RVIII-B (18) calling for autonomy, as herein attached, and presented to the district meeting for consideration and appropriate action;

Whereas, on the occasion of the First Meeting of the District held on June 24, 2006, a delegation of brethren from the Masonic District No. RVIII-B (18) led by VW Vispero Mayor, PDDGM, VW Edward Chua, PJGL, and VW Salvador Santiago, Jr., PDDGM, requested the presiding District Deputy Grand Master and were granted the privilege to present to the district meeting its Manifesto;

Whereas, said Manifesto raised important concerns regarding the governance and management of the Grand Lodge of the Philippines, as follows:

1. what has happened to and what has been done in relation to our Acacia Fund?
2. what assistance has the Grand Lodge extended to the Blue Lodges who are in dire need of a lodge room for their meetings, activities, etc.?
3. what has become of our inherent right to choose and elect the officers of the Grand Lodge?;

Whereas, the sense of the district meeting feel that the concerns raised are valid and need to be addressed immediately in order that harmony and common welfare within the Fraternity be continuously promoted;

Whereas, the sense of the district meeting likewise believe that the brethren of Masonic District No. RVIII-B (18), in calling for autonomy, has all the good intentions at heart of trying to resolve said concerns raised and to promote greater harmony and common welfare among the lodges and members of the Fraternity.

Now, therefore, be it resolved, as it is hereby resolved, that the District
support this Manifesto of the officers and members of Masonic
District No. RVIII-B (18) calling for autonomy;

Resolved further, that copies of this Resolution, together with the Manifesto attached thereto, be furnished to the Most Worshipful Grand Master of Masons of the Philippines for his information and due consideration; and also, to the officers and members of Masonic District No. RVIII-B (18), and other districts and lodges within the Grand Jurisdiction for their information, as may be possible within the means of the District.

On motion by VW Allan P. Mate, DGL and Treasurer of Mt. Huraw 25

Lodge No. 98, and duly seconded by VW Pastor T. Tabale, PDDGM from
East Gate Lodge No. 232, and VW Romeo D. Atencio, PDGL and Auditor of Northern Samar Lodge No. 211, UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED by the First District Meeting, Free and Accepted Masons of the Philippines, held on June 24, 2006 in Mt. Huraw Lodge Masonic Temple, Catbalogan, Samar, Philippines.

Certified Correct:

ROMEO D. ATENCIO, PDGL
Secretary
Masonic District No. RVIII-A (16)
Attested:

ABUNDIO L. AMANTE
District Deputy Grand Master
Masonic District No. RVIII-A (16)

10. Resolution No RVIIIA-1

2007-03-15T08:04:00.000+08:00

JULY 4, 2006 EMAIL

Masonic District No. RVIII-A
Free and Accepted Masons of the Philippines
Catbalogan, Samar

Resolution No. RVIIIA-1, 2006

Resolution Enjoining the Most Worshipful
Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of the Philippines
To Declare the Election and Subsequent Installation of the Junior Grand Warden, During the 90th Annual Communication, As Irregular and Unconstitutional; and Therefore, Null and Void

Whereas, on 28th April 2006, gross irregularity occurred at the election for the position of Junior Grand Warden during the 90th Annual Communication of the Grand Lodge of the Philippines held in Cebu City;

Whereas, the Past Grand Masters (PGMs), in exercising their power to nominate the candidates for the position of Junior Grand Warden, announced only three (3) nominees despite the Constitution of the Grand Lodge clearly stipulating otherwise; these three nominees being as follows: (1) Peter U. Lim Lo Suy, (2) Peter T. Aragon, and (3) Edgardo C. Perez;

Whereas, the Constitution of the Grand Lodge of the Philippines, for the election of the Junior Grand Warden, clearly and unequivocally stipulates (Part I, Article V, Section 5, Paragraph d.7.) to wit:

“…. The final list of brethren worthy for the position of Junior Grand Warden, which shall not be less than five (5) nor more than seven (7), shall be announced to the brethren one hour (1) before the election.”

Whereas, despite being reminded by some brethren on the floor of the clear and unequivocal stipulation of the Constitution, and of the unconstitutionality of their nomination, the PGMs insisted on their “nomination of three” even in gross disregard of the Constitution;

Whereas, in the Grand Lodge Circular No. 1-PGMs addressed to all Grand Lodge Officers, DDGMs, DGLs and lodges in this grand jurisdiction, dated March 14, 2006, carrying the subject “Nominated Brethren”, and signed by the Grand Secretary, MW Danilo D. Angeles, PGM; there presented were six brethren nominees declared by the PGMs, namely: Medardo Benjamin O. Apacible, Peter T. Aragon, Edward Y. Chua, Manuel Lee, Peter U. Lim Lo Suy, and Edgardo C. Perez;

Whereas, on inquiry made by some brethren on the floor as to what happened to these nominees, the PGMs, through MW Rudyardo Bunda, simply answered that only three (3) brethren were found “worthy and qualified” for final nomination;

Whereas, this simple answer seemed simply incredible, what with the six (6) names of nominated brethren already circularized, the presence of a multitude of Past Masters in the Grand Jurisdiction many of them outstanding masons recognized as such by the annual Grand Master’s awards; and the PGMs simply cannot select out of these brethren those who would be “worthy and qualified” for the position of Junior Grand Warden a minimum of five (5) in compliance with the Constitution of the Grand Lodge;

Whereas, it now appears that, with this actuation, the PGMs seemed to have a favored candidate for the position of the Junior Grand Warden and that they were bent on pushing this candidacy even as far as violating the Constitution of the Grand Lodge;

Whereas, the Election Committee (Elecom) has the powers and functions to exercise control over the processes of elections of the Grand Lodge as stipulated in Part I, Article VI, Section 7 of its Constitution;

Whereas, the Elecom, despite their constitutional powers to exercise control over this election process, did not do so in order to put a check to this excessive and irregular act of the PGMs;

Whereas, the Elecom, despite reminders and objections of the brethren on the floor as to the unconstitutionality and unlawfulness of the “nomination of three” made by the PGMs, just proceeded with the election of the Junior Grand Warden in gross disregard of said reminders and objections;

Whereas, the Elecom, in this instance, seemed simply powerless and subservient in face of the might of the PGMs even to the point of acquiescence to an irregular and unconstitutional act;

Whereas, this unfortunate event at the 90th AnCom has caused serious disharmony within Fraternity to the point of schism, where many brethren regard this not as an isolated irregular act but part of the whole pattern of excessiveness of the PGMs that they can tolerate no more;

Now, therefore, be it resolved, as it is hereby resolved, that the Most Worshipful Grand Master be respectfully enjoined to declare the election, and consequently the installation, of the Junior Grand Warden during the 90th AnCom as irregular and unconstitutional, and therefore, null and void;

Resolved further, that the Most Worshipful Grand Master, as consequence, also declare the position of the Junior Grand Warden vacant until such time that proper and regular election shall have been held and the duly and regularly elected officer shall have been installed;

Furthermore, that the PGMs be admonished also to act with humility and brotherly love in the conduct of their functions, to maintain and support the Constitution of the Grand Lodge; and be reminded that they remain duty- bound to be good master masons who are willing to meet on the level, to act by the plumb and to part upon the square, and that no one should ever put themselves over and above the Constitution of the Grand Lodge and the regulations of the Fraternity;

Furthermore, that the Constitution of the Grand Lodge be amended to the effect that:

(1) the roles and powers of the PGMs shall have been placed in the proper perspective and not enshrine them as uncontrollable overlords of the Fraternity;

(2) the Electoral Committee (Elecom) be empowered as a constitutional body elected by and accountable to the Annual Communication, having real and not ceremonial control over the processes of the elections of the Grand Lodge, and should not anymore be subject to consultations with and censure by the PGMs;

Resolved still further, that the Most Worshipful Grand Master of Masons of the Philippines be respectfully furnished with copy of this Resolution for his information and appropriate action; and still further, that efforts be also made by the district to share the information of this Resolution to other districts and lodges within the Grand Jurisdiction.

On motion by WB Celso O. Edos, Worshipful Master of Northern Samar Lodge No. 211 and duly seconded by VW Pastor T. Tabale, PDDGM from East Gate Lodge No. 232, UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED by the First District Meeting, Free and Accepted Masons of the Philippines, held on June 24, 2006 in Mt. Huraw Lodge Masonic Temple, Catbalogan, Samar, Philippines.

Certified Correct:

ROMEO D. ATENCIO, PDGL
Secretary
Masonic District No. RVIII-A (16)

Attested:
ABUNDIO L. AMANTE
District Deputy Grand Master Masonic District No. RVIII-A (16)
Masonic District No. RVIII-A
Free and Accepted Masons of the Philippines
Catbalogan, Samar

9. News Bulletin NR 5

2007-03-15T08:02:00.000+08:00

KKK NEWS BULLETIN NR 5

Flash News - It was affirmed that indeed sometime before June 12, 2006, the expelled EAM (who became WM and PM ) was seen in the compound of the GLP in the company of DDGM Mario Marasigan. Both are /were plural members of the same Lodges. Any connivance? Where was the Tyler?

Mendez-Nunez Lodge No 316 was informed of the impending visit of DDGM Marasigan. However he did not arrive. Neither did the DGL or the GLI. So for two (2) months, the Lodge could not proceed with their Conferral Works in the absence of these officers. The DGL was out of the country. The GLI was not yet appointed nor installed. While the extendee GLI is now a DGL. The Brethrens AFFIRMED their FIDELITY to the COVENANT and the KKK.

After the DGL failed to enter the Lodge as the Tyler did not make any alarm, the DGL wrote a COMPLAINT against the WM. The JGL acted forhaste and summoned the WM and the Tyler to present themselves and their answer to him on July 03, 2006 at 6 pm at Lodge No 2. The JGL signed the summons as the Chairman of the District Committee on Jurisprudence.ANY COMMENT ??? With this, tatangapin pa ba ng Lodge itong DGL ? Alam kaya ni DDGM Marasigan ito dahil wala siyang lagda or endorsement ! Tumawag ang JGL na ito kay WM at sinabing magusap na lang tayo tungkol dito para hindi na ito umabot pa sa Grand Lodge. Ano ba ito ? Parang pulis tactics. Ang lagay ay ano ba talaga kuya? In exchange for what ??? Ano ito ! TAKUTAN ??? NEGOTIATION ??? MATAPANG PO ANG KKK !!!

We are watching the developments in Leyte on the reported establishment of the United Grand Lodge of the Philippines with initially Lodges in Leyte and Samar as the founding members.There is a scheduled Convention on July 08, 2006 at Tacloban, Leyte of the new Grand Lodge.

We are also watching the developments in Batangas . It has a similar situation in Cavite. A ranking PNP Officer , who is not from the Host Lodge was appointed DDGM. Is there a KKB brewing in Batangas?. Text messages received that a group of Batangas Brethrens, who are in support of the Leyte move to organize the UGLP, are also planning an Independence Movement in Batangas. We will watch this development if it will materialize. Text message from the Batangas DDGM says that the report of a Batangas Independence Movement is not true.

We are also watching Western Visayas as there are reports that nine (9) Lodges are also poised to declare their independence from the GLP. Ang 113 years old na Pilar Lodge No 15 was the scene of another TILED situation. The full entourage of DDGM, DGLs, GLIs were told that as visiting ordinary brothers they will be allowed entry, BUT NOT as regalia wearing GLP Officers for the District. They waited. When they forced entry, the WM declared an INDEFINITE RECESS. They dialogued with the PMs of the Lodge. NOBODY budged from their position. They threatened the Lodge. The Lodge stood firm. This is KKK. All threatened Lodges will be supported by ALL UNITED CAVITENOS. Please ALLOW US TO LABOR IN PEACE

July 04, 2006… VWB Jaime V Bantolo

8. News Bulletin NR 04

2007-03-15T08:00:00.000+08:00

KKK NEWS BULLETIN NR 04

DDGM Mario Marasigan is PM 2003 of Lodge 346. DGLs Reynaldo Rillo is PM 1992, Delfin Narvaez is PM 2001, Ceasar Catubo is PM 2004 , all of Mt Mainam Lodge No 49. DGLs Eleuterio Sierra is PM 2000 of St Augustine Lodge No 300 and 1st Master Feb-May 2004, and Crestituto Sepacio is PM May-Dec 2004 of Trece Martires Lodge No 350. DGL Abraham Tolentino is PM 2005 of Tagaytay Lodge No 165. DGL Rafael Creencia is PM 1987 of Palawan Lodge , Puerto Princesa, Palawan. So we have 6 DGLs coming from 3 Lodges out of 17 Lodges of Cavite while 1 DGL is a PM from Palawan Lodge NOT from Cavite.

GLIs Edgardo G Narvaez is PM 1999 of Primera Luz Filipina Lodge No 69,
Alfredo de los Santos is PM 2004 of Dasmarinas Lodge 346 and PGLI 2005.

They had been installed. Reportedly GLI Petronio H Vicedo is PM 1977 of Indang Lodge No 115. Other GLIs are still to be appointed The Installation Rituals were READ by the Installing Officer who is a DGL. These are the GM appointed PROFICIENT DGLs as defined by his latest EDICT and CIRCULAR.

DDGM Mario Marasigan had to WAIT while the brethrens of St Augustine Lodge No 300. settled the OBJECTION to his visit. The WM divided the house with a vote of 9 to 7 to permit the ENTRY into the Lodge of the visitor. The JGL and DGLs members of the Lodge were not happy.The JGL had to ORDER the Secretary to PUT ON RECORD those who MOVED and SECONDED the MOTION. ( Marami pa lang WM sa Loyang ito ) This Lodge is divided as half its members formed a new lodge – the Trece Martires Lodge No 350 where the DDGM , the JGL, and 3 DGLs are plural members. Later several members

LEFT while the meeting is not yet closed.They were joined by the new GLI.
DDGM Mario Marasigan REAFFIRMED that he CANNOT AWAIT to be DDGM. Matagal pang magHOST ang mga Lodge na plural member siya. Sayang ang opurtunidad. Tapos na ang 2 months; 10 months TO GO na lang., he said.

FLASH NEWS !!!!! It was reported that the famous COWAN EAM EXPELLED by the Grand Jurisdiction continous to COMMUNICATE and PROVIDE FINANCIAL and LOGISTICS support to his former Lodges and CRONIES who are NOW in position in the District. VERY SAD NEWS INDEED . ANO BA NAMAN ??? AND IN RETURN FOR WHAT??? Sabi daw. para IAPPEAL muli ang kaso niya , BUBUKSAN daw uli ang kaso niya. Baka daw siya makabalik sa Masonirya ??? ANO ! ANO ! ANO !

KKK had MAJORITY of the Lodges in Cavite supporting its FIDELITY to the COVENANT. KKK had the GREATER MAJORITY of MEMBERS of the Cavite Lodges SUPPORTING its GOALS and ASPIRATIONs of FIDELITY to the COVENANT . IS THERE STILL ANY DOUBT ON THE WILL AND PLEASURE OF THE BRETHREN ???

NEWSBREAK !!!! DDGM Mario Marasigan called up WM Danny Florendo of Cavite Lodge No 2 to inform him that Cavite Lodge is to HOST the MD 4A District Meeting on July 16, 2006. WM Florendo informed him that Cavite Lodge No 2 is already COMMITTED to HOST the KKK Assembly on July 16, 2006. BINABA ni DDGM Marasigan ang telepono

June 27, 2006 WB Jaime V Bantolo, PDDGM, KKK CONVENOR

7. Issues and Concerns

2007-03-15T07:59:00.000+08:00

ISSUES AND CONCERNS OF MASONIC DISTRICT NR 2 CAVITE PROVINCE SERIES NR 4

1. MAY GULO BA SA DISTRICT 2 PROVINCE OF CAVITE ?

Mayroon na po. Nagumpisa po noong April 29, 2006 sa Annual Communication sa Cebu City ng ipahayag ni MW Romeo Yu na ang DDGM sa District 2 Cavite province ay si WB Mario Marasigan na HINDI nominado ng Distrito sa pagka DDGM, na hindi PM ng Host Lodge, at HINDI Host Lodge ang mga Plural Lodge member niya ( Bagong Ilaw Lodge No 97,
Dasmarinas Lodge No 346, Trece Martires Lodge No 350, Molino Lodge No 352). HINDI PO TINUPAD ang Gentlemens Agreement at Provision ng District Constitution tungkol sa DDGM.

2. SINO BA ANG DAPAT SISIHIN SA GULONG NANGYAYARI SA DISTRICT 2 CAVITE PROVINCE ? SINO BA AND NAGPASIMULA NITO ?

Siguro si GM dahil hindi niya GINALANG ang kaniyang SALITA na “ I will appoint the DDGM from the Host Lodge…”

Siguro si GM dahil hindi niya GINALANG ang GENTLEMENs AGREEMENT ng Distrito na nagbigay KATAHIMIKAN sa nakaraang 20 taon.

Siguro si GM dahil GALIT siya sa Cabite sa PAG FILE ng ELECTIONEERING COMPLAINT noong 2003.

Siguro si DDGM dahil tinangap niya ang puwesto gayung HINDI naman siya Nominado ng Distrito.

Siguro si DDGM dahil tinangap niya ang puwesto gayung HINDI naman Host Lodge ang Lodge niya.

Siguro si DDGM dahil HINDI niya GINALANG ang GENTLEMENs AGREEMENT .

Siguro ang KAMPO na GUSTONG SIRAIN ang GENTLEMENs AGREEMENT .

Siguro ang KAMPO ng mga GUSTONG SIRAIN ang UNITY at HARMONY ng Cabite

3. Ano naman ang pakiusap ng bagong pamunuan ng Distrito? Nila VW Marasigan? Nila VW Lupisan ? Ng mga bagong DGL ?

Nahingi po sila ng suporta !!!. Magsamasama na raw tayo !!!

- MAGSASAMASAMA TAYO ? SAAN ? - PARA SIRAIN, BASTUSIN, HUWAG GALANGIN, IBASURA AND GENTLEMENS AGREEMENT NA NAGBIGAY KATAHIMIKAN AT HARMONY SA ATIN SA NAKALIPAS NA 20 TAON !!!

- Dapat we should ALL JOIN HANDS in our FIDELITY to our COVENANT. BY THAT HINDI na lagay sa alanganing posisyon si GM. BUT BECAUSE SOMEONE WAS WILLING TO ACCEPT, it provided the REASONS to pursue HIS PLANS
4. Ano pa ang kanilang depensa ?

- Na sila ay NAHIRANG NG GRAND MASTER !!! NA SILA AY NASUNOD LAMANG SA UTOS NG GRAND MASTER !

- ALAM NINYO ANG GENTLEMENS AGREEMENT. SINUWAY NINYO ITO SA PAGTANGGAP NINYO NG PUWESTO.. NOW YOU SUFFER THE CONSEQUENCES OF YOUR ACTIONS , OF YOUR VIOLATIONS TO YOUR OBLIGATIONS , OF YOUR INFIDELITY TO OUR LANDMARKS, of your AMBITIONS..

The Grand Master normally asks you of his intention to appoint you and asks if you will ACCEPT. YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO REFUSE.

Sabi ni WB Marasigan .. Nandidyan na po eh… Opurtunidad na po !!!
MAGTITIIS NA LANG PO AKO !!!

- YOU COULD OR SHOULD HAVE REFUSED IF YOU AFFIRMED YOUR COMMITMENT TO OUR COVENANT , TO OUR GENTLEMENS AGREEMENT. YOU DID NOT AWAIT YOUR TIME WITH PATIENCE.

5. Dagdag depensa pa - wala ba kayong BROTHERLY LOVE ?

We did practice it. FOR THE PAST 20 YEARS WE SHARED OUR LOVE TO THE FRATERNITY, TO THE DISTRICT, TO THE LODGES, TO THE
BRETHRENS HENCE WE WERE HARMONIOUS

WE WHISPERED GOOD COUNSEL TO THEM EXPECTING A REFORMATION FOR THE PAST THREE (3) YEARS BUT THEIR UNBRIDLED AMBITIONS SHOWED.

WE WARNED THEM OF APPROACHING DANGERS BUT THEY CONTINUED TO SEEK DIVISION OF THE DISTRICT.

- How many times should we FORGIVE ? For many times we FORGAVE the MISTAKES of EAM PM of one of our Lodge. UNTIL WE FOUND OUT HE WAS NOT MADE A MM.. YET after he was exposed , YOU CONTINUED to PATRONIZE him. YET after he was JUDGED, you CONTINUED to HARBOR him. The HORRORs of his deeds to the FRATERNITY is immeasurable. He entered Cavite through your Lodge.

WHY IS THERE A PENALTY FOR VIOLATING THE OBLIGATION ? Did we LACK BROTHERLY LOVE ?

6, Dagdag depensa pa -- Kayo ba ay BUILDERS or DESTRUCTIONIST ?

We had been BUILDING this District for the past 20 years into a MODEL for UNITY, PEACE and HARMONY. Hence the various RESOLUTIONs and AMENDMENTS to the Constitution in order to achieve the HIGHER levels of HARMONY in a GRAND SCALE
.
- This was DESTROYED RECENTLY by the VIOLATION of the COVENANT on our GENTLEMENs AGREEMENT

ON THE OTHER HAND, PERHAPS YOU ARE CONSIDERING YOURSELVES BUILDERS or CREATORS OF NEW LODGES IN ORDER TO CREATE NEW DISTRICTS. Ok na sana , kaya lang NABUKING si COWAN EAM, di sana DDGM natin siya.

ANO ANG SOLUSYON SA PROBLEMA ?

NONE for the moment as WB Marasigan is willing to suffer the consequences of his acts; as the FAITHFUL are NOT willing to RECOGNIZE those sitting; as the GM will STAND PAT on his decision..

HENCE if we cannot achieve it now, we hope to achieve it by MAY 01, 2007. Meanwhile we shall ALL be in the DARK.

Perhaps someone will bring the LIGHT. Is that YOU ???.

June 21, 2006. VWB Jaime V BANTOLO, PDDGM, KKK CONVENOR

6. News Bulletin NR 03

2007-03-15T07:57:00.000+08:00

KKK NEWS BULLETIN NR 03

1.During the monthly Stated Meeting of St Augustine Lodge No 300, the WM CAUTIONED the white apron wearing new JGL, NOT TO SMOKE INSIDE THE LODGE while meeting was in progress.. This JGL NEVER LEARNED as he has the HABIT of SMOKING INSIDE THE LODGE while meeting is going on.

2. During the monthly Stated Meeting of Cavite Lodge No 2 , the white apron wearing DGL was asked to deliver a lecture. He started off with a US Navy joke about Filipino US sailors on liberty. Coming from different regions of the Philippines, they talked about who will pay the drinks. Well the joke put the Ilocanos in a bad light. Immediately the Treasurer ( being an Ilocano ) stood and loudly called the story foul. Well the DGL apologized. A Lodge is a SACRED place as we all know..

3. There is NO TRUTH to the statement that the proper regalia wearing new DGL was NOT ALLOWED TO ENTER Bagong Buhay Lodge No 17 during its Stated Meeting in June. There was NO ALARM at the door until the Lodge was CLOSED.

4. We were told that the TYLER of La Naval Lodge No 269 WARNED the visiting JGL and DGL of an approaching danger if they enter the Lodge. Both LEFT thereafter.

5. The Brethren of Pintong Bato Lodge No 51 during their Stated Meeting in June, voted to Host the June monthly Meeting of the KKK in their Lodge last June 18, 2006.

6. MD 4A District Meeting, scheduled last June 18, 2006 at Pintong Bato Lodge 51 with Molino Lodge 352 as Host, transferred their venue to Trece Martires Lodge 350. The Meeting allegedly HAD NO QUORUM as only 8 Lodges were represented.

7. During the KKK Assembly last June 18, 2006 at Pintong Bato Lodge No 51. attended by 4 PDDGM, 1 RDGM, 2 JGL, 27 PDGLs, 15 PM, several Lodge officers and brethren. Discussed were; a proposed Resolution to amend Article XVIII Section 1 and the KKK Program of Action, VW Capuyan, PJGL gave a Masonic Lecture, while VW Recafrente remarked on the Dialogue, under the mango tree, with illustrious PGMs . The open forum heralded the courageous statements of VWB Efren Barcelona, the story on 2003 electioneeing was told by VWB Kit Aquino, the humble non-acceptance of appointment as DDGM by VWB Virgilio Sarmiento was narrated by him

8. After so long, finally the DDGM visited his first (1st) Plural lodge in Cavite. He was received coldly. The WM stated that the Constitution mandated him to receive the DDGM. He left shortly to proceed to another Lodge where I saw him seated below and not inside the Lodge .He said magtatapos na raw meeting.

9. In the last two (2) Necrological Services , the attending DDGM, JGL, DGL were NOT ASKED to deliver a EULOGY or say a remark by the presiding WM.

June 20, 2006 - VWB Jaime V Bantolo, PDDGM, KKK CONVENOR

5. News Bulletin NR 02

2007-03-15T07:55:00.000+08:00

NEWS BULLETIN NR 02

1. So far TWELVE (12) IMMEDIATE PAST MASTERS (IPM) have DECLINED / NOT ACCEPTED the position of GRAND LODGE INSPECTOR (GLI) in the administration of the DDGM. These Past Masters are the best and most outstanding among the present crop of Past
Masters of the District. There is NOW the big problem which we had told the Grand Master. Majority if not most of the Lodges do not support your appointed DDGM principally because of the VIOLATION of the Covenant or the District Gentlemens Agreement on the appointment of DDGM. We have whispered good counsel and WARNED of the approaching dangers

2. During the June 12, 2006 Independence Day celebration at Kawit, Cavite, ONLY ELEVEN (11) brethrens joined the RW Jimmy Gonzales DGM, and the DDGM during the parade from Josephines Restaurant assembly point

3. Primera Luz Filipina Lodge No 69 voted TO DECLINE Hosting the June 12, 2006 Independence Day celebration for the District in Kawit, Cavite. The Lodge also RETURNED the TEN THOUSAND PESOS given by the DDGM to shoulder expenses for the hosting and for the breakfast and lunch. The Lodge however made available the ground floor as venue for breakfast or lunch

4. Many Lodges HAVE NO GLI. The EXTENDEE GLIs from the past administration have labored long enough and may NO LONGER perform their duty. Since June 1, the DDGM has NOT made any NEW appointment or REPLACED those who have DECLINED the position. Recently new appointees are being sought but REFUSED.

5. The KKK Assembly at Emilio Aguinaldo Memorial Lodge No 31 had a total attendance of 134 Brethrens, with ten (10) PDDGMs , with ALL 17 Lodges represented by their incumbent Officers, Past Masters, Past Grand Lodge officers, elders, and the younger generations. VWB JAIME V BANTOLO was chosen as CONVENOR Chairman On hand co-presiding were VWB NIC RICAFRENTE PDDGM and Chairman of Council of PDDGM, VWB JOSEPH CAPUYAN, PJGL and President of District Guild of Past Masters, and elders led by VWB KIT AQUINO PDGL.

6. The MD 4A District Meeting at Trece Martirez Lodge No 350 was attended by 11 Lodges represented by an elected officer. There were several visiting brethrens from other Districts. There were about 30 who were present. Appointments were announced by the DDGM and fellowship followed. The appointees were NOT INFORMED nor asked if they accept the nomination.

7. NO MASONIC EDUCATION lecture have been delivered so far Even the appointed JGL , VW Ed Lupisan had NO lecture to deliver when called upon last stated meeting of St Augustine Lodge No 300. WALA pa raw program of instructions on subjects or topics to lecture.

VWB JAIME V BANTOLO, CONVENOR, KKK

4. News Bulletin

2007-03-15T07:54:00.000+08:00

N E W S B U L L E T I N

On May 03, 2006 , twenty four concerned Master Masons met at General Trias , Cavite and expressed their strong concerned on the VIOLATION of the Masonic District 2 GENTLEMENS AGREEMENT. This Agreement was made in the District Convention at Tagaytay City in 1986 where it was agreed “ that henceforth the Hosting for the Annual District Convention shall be rotated among the Lodges of MD 2 and the DDGM shall come from the Host Lodge..” This Agreement was RESPECTED by all Grand Masters since 1986 EXCEPT the present GM. This Agreement was RESPECTED by all Lodges and all Master Masons EXCEPT the presently appointed DDGM.

2. A MANIFESTO “ ONE CAVITE …united we stand, divided we fall “ Series 1- 2006 , was signed by the 24 Master Masons to express continuing support to the GENTLEMENS AGREEMENT ; to manifest DISPLEASURE ON THE VIOLATIONS OF THE GENTLEMENS AGREEMENT ; to manifest DISAPPROVAL to the VIOLATORS of this AGREEMENT ; to SHOW our SENSITIVITY to the DISHARMONY these VIOLATORS have spawned. Please signed the Manifestos given to your respective Lodges. Several Lodges have already signed. Some Lodges have prepared their own Manifestos. These will be endorsed to the leadership of the Grand Lodge.

The Conference of Brethren of Cavite Province or the KAPULUNGAN NG MGA KAPATID SA KABITE ( KKK ) assembled at Emilio Aguinaldo Memorial Lodge no 31 on May 21, 2006 . This was an Assembly of Concerned Master Masons, of the District Guild of Past Masters, and the Council Of Past DDGMs numbering 120 MMs , PDDGMs, PJGLs, PDGLs, PGLIs, PMs, WMs, SWs. JWs, other Lodge officers and Elders. In general, the Assembly expressed support to the GENTLEMENS AGREEMENT , support to the MANIFESTO of May 03, 2006, support to foster UNITY and HARMONY among the Brethrens of Cavite .

An Assembly of CORE GROUPs of Districts in BATANGAS , LAGUNA,
CAVITE, ZAMBALES, BATAAN , BULACAN, PAMPANGA, TARLAC, NUEVA ECIJA SOUTH, and a District in Manila met at Angeles City last May 23, 2006. The various District SHARES THE SAME PROBLEM OF DDGM APPOINTMENT with Cavite and will take appropriate actions to manifest their DISPLEASURE and DISAPPROVAL ON THE GMs action. The Assembly seeks for a SPECIAL ANCOM to address the ELECTORAL REFORMs. Let us support their Manifesto or Resolution.

May 30, 2006

VWB JAIME V BANTOLO