"Protect the integrity": the regularity discourse in the international masonic relations between Brazil and England (1880-2000)[2]

Felipe Côrte Real de Camargo[1]

Freemasonry is as important in England as it is in Brazil. In the Anglo-Saxon country, the Craft is responsible for the consolidation of a very particular club culture, for the reinvention of male middle and upper class sociability and the social support for the House of Hannover in its beginnings. From the 18th century onwards, being a freemason was the very essence of being an English gentleman and English Freemasonry was a core instrument of the British Empire[3]. Its spreading towards Europe built a specific mentality that was identified with the Enlightenment itself[4].

In Brazil, Freemasonry arrived when the country was still a colony of Portugal. The first lodges were constituted by foreigners[5]. The first Brazilian lodges were established in the 18th century, and warranted by France or Portugal. With the non-existence of political parties, freemasonry played this role in the political sphere since they gathered an elite that used the structure provided by the Craft to organize themselves politically[6]. Since then, Freemasonry was present in every single political upheaval in Brazil, being a strong part of the political imaginary.

One may think that masonic international relations, and more, that the foreign affairs of a given masonic body concern strictly freemasons, therefore, that the interest in such subjects are restricted to specialized masonic journals and newsletters for internal use. Nevertheless, contemporary historical studies show us that such affairs, hitherto understood as filigrees, noteworthy for aficionados, in fact can be tipping points for a wider and more sophisticated understanding of the theme.

A masonic body, or masonic obedience, is the highest administration of a determined group of lodges. The bodies, or obediences, are characterized by their sovereignty, among its lodges in a given territory. They can celebrate treaties with other obediences since they can represent the lodges of its jurisdiction. These are the nomenclatures that freemasons use to address these entities, hence to bring these terms to this article is to allow the reader to understand freemasonry in its own terms. Those bodies or obediences can take the form of a Grand Lodge or Grand Orient. There is a common misunderstanding that a Grand Lodge would be the one that practices only one rite, while a Grand Orient would be the one practising several rites. Although widespread, this cannon falls apart when the reality of freemasonry is observed worldwide.

Historiographical interpretation is vital to the history of freemasonry. Therefore, it is extremely delicate to talk about "the freemasonry", in this way, with a definite article, since it is a universalist conception which removes its depth and particularities. This notion of a "universal freemasonry" was produced in a specific time and it is used nowadays for "internal consumption", such understanding of universality fades quickly when confronted with specific cases. Since the universality of freemasonry is one of its monuments, this suggests what Jacques Le Goff wrote highlighting that «[...] result of the effort of historical societies to impose to the future - voluntarily or involuntarily - a determined self-image. On the edge, there is not a document-truth. Every document is a lie. It is for the historian to not act like a naïve person»[7].

For a better comprehension, it is important to remember that it's extremely fragile - or denotes a will of hegemony - to talk about "The History". Moreover, it is equally precarious to talk about "the history of freemasonry" or "the Brazilian freemasonry", or even "the English freemasonry" for that matter. For this reason, I suggest a restriction on the topic of masonic regularity and how this concept has been used in different ways and for distinct purposes by the so-called regular bodies in Brazil and England.

Some questions pertaining to masonic international relations gain complexity when analysed in the long run[8]. Thus, to introduce this subject within this article it is necessary to adopt a broader historical cut-out, while it is necessary to dismiss some other questions.

To understand masonic international relations requires familiarity with two concepts very dear to most masonic obediences, although very fluid ones if we observe them accurately. They are the concepts of regularity and recognition. Far from being undisputed and valid to all freemasons, regularity and recognition may vary not only from one country to another but also from one obedience to another. These concepts can be based on traditions that date back to its history or due to pure political decisions, commonplace in treaties between independent entities.

Nonetheless, regularity is regarded as important for most of the masonic bodies. Being regular is to have access to a more universal freemasonry since the so-called regular bodies, in most cases, hold the larger number of lodges in their countries. Another aspect is that being regular is to be connected to tradition and considering that the most important traditions of freemasonry were invented[9] in England, it is the United Grand Lodge of England who sets the tone of regularity. Although different freemasonries come into being in every country, all of them sought to merge into a national attitude with the alleged ancient traditions of freemasonry.

It will be refrained to go into the specifics about the regularity of this or that masonic body, since it is, mostly, a political decision imbued of value judgement that fits the obediences in its relations. Following Henrik Bogdan and Jan A.M. Snoek[10] I will use the most favourable nomenclature for both major concepts of freemasonry, whom call regular the masonic bodies that identify themselves as, or who search for recognition, within the model created by the, then, Grand Lodge of London and Westminster in 1717 and its Constitutions; and to call liberal[11] those masonic obediences that also claim its origins in the guilds, with its subsequent transition to what has been called speculative masonry, but that adopt a different understanding from the rules established in the English Constitutions. The most notorious example is the one from Grand Orient de France that in 1877 ceased to require from its members a belief in a Creative Principle, aside from making optional the reference to the Great Architect of the Universe, the presence of the Bible in its rituals[12] and more recently, in 2010, started officially to initiate women.

The regular bodies describe as irregular those who practice freemasonry in a distinctive way. While liberal masonic bodies qualify, at times, their regular counterparts as conservatives. Therefore, to adopt the denominations regular and liberal is to translate, in their own terms, the most favourable meanings within the various names that are given to both currents.

Regular Freemasonry in England and Brazil

The relations between Brazil and England will be analysed within the inner workings of the so-called regular masonic bodies, since their tenet is the regularity discourse. On the English side, there is only the Unite Grand Lodge of England (UGLE), the single regular obedience in that country and on the Brazilian side, there are three entities which represent, and partially recognize each other, as representatives of regular freemasonry. In the latter, there are the Grande Oriente do Brasil (GOB), a federate body that comprises twenty-seven Grand Orients, one in each Brazilian State, plus the Federal District. The Grande Oriente do Brasil is the most ancient masonic body in that country. The Confederação de Maçonaria Simbólica do Brasil (CMSB)[13] is a collegiate that reunites twenty-seven independent State Grande Lodges, like the existing model in the United States of American. Lastly, there is the Confederação da Maçonaria Brasileira (COMAB)[14], an institution that is composed by twenty-one independent State Grand Orients.

One could describe Brazil as having three masonic entities, but not three obediences or masonic bodies, since those are defined by their sovereignty, internal and external; that is, in Brazil, overall, there are forty-nine masonic obediences that identify themselves as regular [15]. The CSMB and the COMAB are entities that can coordinate joint actions of State Grande Lodges and State Grand Orients, respectively. As the English list of Foreign Grand Lodges Recognised and the American List of Lodges demonstrate, there is independence of each state masonic body, within CSMB and COMAB, that allows them to celebrate treaties of international recognition. Therefore, one can perceive that there is an analytical fragility when there is a broad reference to "the Brazilian Freemasonry" or when it is said that Brazil has three masonic bodies.

In England, since 1813, there is just one regular masonic obedience, the United Grand Lodge of England (UGLE), that congregates more than 6.800 masonic lodges, divided between forty-seven Provincial Grand Lodges within the England, Wales, Isle of Man and Channel Islands[16], besides thirty-three Masonic Districts spread through Africa, the Americas, Europe, Asia and Oceania. The year of 1813 was pivotal for English Freemasonry, since it was when the union between "Antients" and "Moderns" [17] took place, forming the united masonic body that England has had since then [18].

The relations between regular obediences are intrinsically connected to the United Grand Lodge of England by an element called the "Regularity of Origin", that in the terms of the document "Basic Principles for Grand Lodge Recognition" defines "Regularity of Origin; i.e. each Grand Lodge shall have been established lawfully by a duly recognized Grand Lodge or by three or more regularly constituted Lodges" [19]. Thereby, according to the UGLE requisites, all regular lodges are, in some way, linked to the Grand Lodge of London and Westminster, stated to be founded in 1717 by four masonic lodges.

Regularity carry a series of aspects that, largely, were detailed by authors such as Christopher Haffner[20] and Michel Brodsky[21] in articles of the masonic Journal Ars Quatuor Coronatorum which publishes annually the transactions of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge nº2076. Given its almost three hundred years of history, modern freemasonry shows that the requirements and criteria of regularity were moulded according to the interests of the Grand Lodge of England and, afterwards, the UGLE. As Haffer summarizes: «A simple principle has emerged, that regularity of origin has differing meanings in differing contexts. Many Grand Lodges are recognized today that do not meet present-day standards. The only way that regularity of origin can be judged is by looking at the acceptable standards of the time».[22]

Operative Heritage and Transition

Nonetheless, what appeals to regularity is the so-called operative heritage, that is the theory that the current format of freemasonry, often called "speculative freemasonry", derives from the guilds of the medieval times, hence called "operative freemasonry" in this type of masonic narrative. Far from being a consensus among authors[23] it is still the most used theory for explanations of all kinds within this plethora of organizations that is freemasonry[24]. The transition from the "operative" format to the "speculative" one presents itself very naturally if one bears in mind that the concept of transition, its literal meaning or that most elaborated one that we can find in Marx's work "The Capital". The notion of transition together with that of genesis are those "without which history would be unthinkable. In such processes, the pure logic treatment would conduct to arbitrary schemes divorced from the factual reality", analyses the historian Jacob Gorender prefacing the work of the German thinker[25].

Beyond the operative heritage, in practice, the United Grand Lodge of England has the precedence over the modern masonic system, the one based on a central administration, a Grand Lodge. It is not by accident that the rules for regularity are imbued by elements from the English Common Law, as the requirement for a Grand Lodge to be established by "three or more regularly constituted Lodges" [26]. Such principle lies in the legal Latin principle tres faciunt collegium, in which the English Law guided the formation of organizations or corporations, being necessary a minimum of three people to compound them[27].

The first account available about the formation of the Grand Lodge of London and Westminster is the one commonly named "Anderson's Constitutions" [28], but such report appears in the second edition only, dated 1738. The author, James Anderson, was twenty-one years away from the event that narrates. There is no other evidence of such meeting[29], thus this renders his accounts, to use an expression of masonic author Nicola Aslan, "pure conjecture" [30].

For an overlook of such events, is known, in an apocryphal way, that on 24th June, 1717, four lodges [31] gathered at the Goose and Gridiron Ale House to elect a new Grand Master. Such decision, according Anderson, was taken a year before, in 1716, with the intention to have a revival of the annual assembly and banquet. The meeting, a year later, would have resulted on the formation of the Grand Lodge of London and Westminster and on the election of its first Grand Master, Anthony Sayer [32].

It followed a hundred years of divisions and the creation of other Grand Lodges, often called rebels [33]. In 1756 there was the appearance of what would be, for almost fifty years, the nemesis of the first Grand Lodge, that was the Grand Lodge of the "Antients". These differences were partially pacified only in 1813 when the Union Treaty was signed and the "Antients" were incorporated[34].

The Grande Oriente do Brasil (GOB), in turn, has a rich and fragmented history. It was formed by the same group that fomented advanced Brazil´s independence from Portugal. It's first Grand Master was José Bonifácio de Andrada e Silva, one of the most important figures in the independence process and mentor of the then Prince Pedro de Alcântara who later became D.Pedro I of the Brazilian Empire in 1822. D.Pedro I himself was declared Grand Master in 1822 and shut down the Grand Orient in 1823, most probably dreading its potential capacity of summoning part of the élite. The Grande Oriente do Brasil returned to its activities in 1831, after the abdication of D.Pedro I, with José Bonifácio once again in the chair of Grand Master.

The relations between Brazil and England came from the time the former was a colony of Portugal, protégée of the later. During the Napoleonic Wars, the Portuguese Royal Family fled to Brazil under English protection, there they declared the former colony to be part of a United Kingdom within Portugal and Algarve. The Portuguese Royal Family returned to Portugal in April 1821, leaving D.Pedro as regent. During its independence process, in 1822, Brazil had in England its guarantor, it negotiated the terms of Portugal recognition, the Britons knew how to take advantage of Brazilian necessity of stability and build into Brazilian legislation a set of special rules for English citizens that would be fuel to turmoil in the 19th century. Nevetheless, until the beginning of the 20th century, England was the super power to look up to internationally, in both "profane"[35] and masonic terms.

Since its creation in 1822, until its last attempt to unify with other bodies, in 1883, The Grande Oriente do Brasil testified successive schisms. Among them, the creation of another Grand Orient in the 1830's, the Grande Oriente Nacional Brasileiro, or Grande Oriente "do Passeio", as it has become known since it has its headquarters at the Passeio Street (Rua do Passeio), in Rio de Janeiro[36]. Therefore, for the purposes of this article, I will approach the history of the Grande Oriente do Brasil after 1880, year in which it obtains recognition from the United Grand Lodge of England.

Recognition of the Grande Oriente do Brasil by the United Grand Lodge of England

Although pursued since the end of the 1860[37], the recognition of the Grande Oriente do Brasil by the United Grand Lodge of England came just through a direct enquiry[38] of the Admiral Silveira da Mota[39] to the English Grand Master, H.R.H. Albert Edward, future King Edward VII, at the time Prince of Wales. The request was received in 10th January, 1880 and the approval letter was sent twenty days later, which was unusual to the UGLE[40].

The details of such Demand of Recognition[41] deserve a careful study, however some elements are worth highlighting. First, it can be noted that, intentionally or not, the moment chosen for the demand was opportune. The United Grand Lodge of England was extremely concerned about the decision made by the Grand Orient de France, in 1877, to abolish its deistic aspects, freemasonry was, irretrievably, torn in two. Thus, started a race for the fixation, or increase, of zones of influence for both major masonic bodies in terms of prestige. Secondly, the petition was made directly to the Prince of Wales, leaving less room for the normal procedure via Board of General Purposes. Thirdly, there are no signs of a prior agreement in the correspondence analysed, so it is hard to say whether there was a preceding understanding on that matter.

By the requisites of the British body, the recognition of any Brazilian obedience would be compromised since there were disputes over a territory. There was a dispute between two obediences, both named Grande Oriente do Brasil, one added of the designation ao Vale do Lavradio and a schismatic one nominated ao Vale dos Beneditinos, usually called Grande Oriente dos Beneditinos. The latter, after 1872, acted under the appellation Grande Oriente Unido do Brasil - the result of an unsuccessful attempt of Vale do Lavradio and Vale dos Beneditinos to unite, strife lasted for less than five months. Led by the Viscount of Rio Branco, the Grande Oriente do Brasil ao Vale do Lavradio, had started a movement, in 1871, condemning the directions that the Grand Orient de France was taking. It is probable that such actions more to do with recognition as a regular body than with the principle of undisputed authority [42]. As underlines the historian Thiago Werneck Gonçalves: «it can be noticed that the Viscount of Rio Branco raised in defiance to the Grand Orient of France which was marked by a more politicized bias and endowed with strong anticlerical tendencies. The "Lavradio Circle", instead, followed the English current, that defended that freemasonry should be kept away from religious and political debates» [43].

In 1881 the understandings about an exchange of representatives between the English and the Brazilian obediences begun, however such exchange only occurred once, since both performed a more symbolic role than a representative one. The United Grand Lodge of England itself, by 1912, acknowledged that it didn't have a representative of Grande Oriente do Brasil, at the same time it couldn't inform the UGLE on the whereabouts of its representative in Brazil [44]. The exchange of representatives, like so many other aspects of the masonic relations between Brazil and England in the late 19th century, mimicked the foreign affairs of both empires. It can be noticed, by the approximation and search of recognition, that the Freemasons of the Brazilian Empire replicated, somehow, the political orientation of the State's external policy, foremost produced by themselves. There was a significant number of freemasons that worked for the Brazilian Empire's bureaucracy, among them a fair amount worked at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, like the Viscount of Rio Branco or the Admiral Silveira da Mota.

Treaties and Sovereignity

The English concern about the noncompliance of the basic precepts of freemasonry, which would lead to irregularity, was tempered with a pragmatism regarding their zone of influence in the Americas. The UGLE and its representatives [45] wrote vast correspondence and reports about the situation of Freemasonry in Brazil. The reasons mentioned for the English obedience's revision its recognition to its Brazilian counterpart were many. According to its informants (the official and unofficial ones), there were still no unquestionable reasons for the United Grand Lodge of England to sever relations with the Grande Oriente do Brasil, according the Grand Secretary "In the first place we have no definite cause for a quarrel and we only know by hearsay that the Grand Orient of Brazil professes doctrines and is engaged in practices which are contrary to the genuine principles of Freemasonry" [46].

Such accusations became worse in 1912, herewith the interest in regularizing the situation of English Freemasons in Brazil - a problem since the 1830s - led the UGLE to send a mission to Brazil at short notice. The mission produced along the Grande Oriente do Brasil an agreement that put the English lodges under a separate body, the Grande Capítulo do Rito de York[47][Grand Council of Craft Freemasonry in Brazil]. The results of such negotiations were not received with enthusiasm in England, as it can be seen on the final (and confidential) report produced for the UGLE by the Baron of Ampthill about the mission and the negotiations in Brazil: «In short the English Lodges will lead a separate existence under the "protection" of the Grand Orient and we can well regard this arrangement as a friendly act which we can recognize by remaining on terms of mutual civility with the Grand Orient although actual fraternal relations are at an end».[48]

On the Brazilian side, the gains in terms of sovereignty were not few, since the Grand Chapter would be under supervision of the Brazilian obedience, since the Grande Oriente do Brasil had five seats in the Grand Council (interestingly compound by thirty-three members [49]). Besides, the Grand Council should prepare its regulations that would come into effect only after the approval of the Brazilian General Council of the Order, since the same regulations could not conflict with the Constitutions of the Grande Oriente do Brasil. The Brazilian Grand Master would choose his deputy, from a tripartite list, that would inspect the lodges of the rite and besides, all the minutes of the Grand Council would be written in Portuguese and English, as well as all its correspondence, that would be received and replied only by the Brazilian Grand Secretary of the Order. It was a large and strict list for a masonic body used to District Grand Lodges in colonies, former colonies and satellite States. Withal, the main part of the agreement was at the end, where the basic principle of diplomacy would prevail: reciprocity. The treaty in its last paragraph stated: «In return for this concession, the Grand Lodge of England agrees to concede to the Grand Orient of Brazil, when solicited by this body, an equal favour in relation to Freemasons speaking the Portuguese language, who are under the jurisdiction of the said Grand Lodge of England».[50]

The implementation of such agreement did not occur as expected, in one hand for being bellow the expectations of one of the parties, on the other hand because of the approaching war, in 1914. In no time, more reports of irregularities started to arrive in London, including discriminatory practices from masons of other rites and towards them by English freemasons [51]. In the 1920s, from the Brazilian side, the preoccupations related to regularity were of a different nature; intense political campaigns inside and outside the Grande Oriente do Brasil would lead to cracks in the single regular masonic body in Brazil. Such fissures, that would lead to a schism, surely due to the revision of the 1912 Treaty, although during its existence the Grand Council of Craft Masonry in Brazil grew and prosper[52]. In 1935 a new agreement made the installation of the District Grand Lodge of South America possible - its Northern Jurisdiction, in Brazil; important to stress that, this time, there were no reciprocity clause. Surely, the schismatic situation within Brazilian freemasonry played a major role in obtaining the new agreement.

The 1927 schism in Brazil

In 1915, the masonic lodges from São Paulo were probed with respect to the creation of an independent Grand Orient[53]. The power struggle, that mainly involved the states of Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo, started to escalate. The elections for the position of Grand Master of the Grande Oriente do Brasil in 1921, commenced a cumulative process of dissatisfaction that would give rise to the schism of 1927.

With its forwards and backwards the schism of 1927 - and the subsequent schism of 1973 - can be explained, in its internal aspects, by the successive electoral quarrels within the Grande Oriente do Brasil [54]. The election of 1921 from which Mario Behring would come out as victorious, under great protests, creating the opportunity to found of the Grande Oriente de São Paulo, that after a brief independent existence, came back to federate itself within the Grande Oriente do Brasil in 1929[55]. Nonetheless, four years after that election, in 1925, new elections took place in the Brazilian obedience and other controversies arose from the electoral process. This situation put the victory of the Grand Master under suspicion, Mario Behring, proclaimed to be re-elected, such discord promoted a new suffrage, by agreement among the groups in dispute[56].

To proceed with this narrative it is necessary to clarify some things about the structure of freemasonry around the world. The most common practice, and the one accepted as regular by most of the masonic bodies, is that the symbolic or craft degrees (entered apprentice, fellow craftsman and master mason) are under exclusive jurisdiction of the masonic obediences and that the philosophical degrees or appendant orders, of any rite, should be handled by other bodies that administrate the higher degrees of a specific rite[57]. To understand this schism is important to know how the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite (AASR) works in most parts of the world and in Brazil.

After receiving the degree of master mason, it is permitted to seek admission into the higher degrees of the AASR. Such initiatory system has thirty-three degrees, so once in possession of the third degree (master mason), a member can enter the philosophical bodies - as they are known as well - to ascend from the fourth to the thirty-third degree. This system is under the command of an entity called Supreme Council for the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite; its main authority, equivalent to the Grand Master, is the Sovereign Grand Commander.

Differently from most Grand Lodges, like the ones in United States, a country that organized the Scottish Rite[58], in Brazil the command of all rites was connected to the Grand Master. In other words, the Grand Master of the Grande Oriente do Brasil was, automatically, the Sovereign Grand Commander of the AASR, as well as the superior authority of all other rites practiced by the Brazilian body. Such situation, not rarely, was regarded as troublesome for England and affected the maintenance of the recognition of the Grande Oriente do Brasil as regular. An excerpt of a report from 1922 about the situation of the English lodges in Brazil gives a sample of the controversy: «We therefore find ourselves subordinate to a mixed body, part of which the U.G.L of England do not recognize (e.g. the Modern Rite), and further than this the principal officers of the G.O.B. are the chief officers of each Council, and our Council is thus attended by officers who govern Rites regarded by England as irregular, thereby making us irregular by compulsory but involuntary association with them»[59].

The issue at the Grande Oriente do Brasil in the 1920s was, precisely, put an end at the compulsory link between the craft and the higher degrees, mainly the ones from the Scottish Rite. At the unfold of electoral tensions and of political disputes within the GOB, the idea of separation between Grand Orient and Supreme Council spreaded. The question of multiple demands of recognition (i.e. of the United Grand Lodge of England for the craft degrees and of the American Grand Lodges at the higher degrees) caused a Gordian knot, incremented by power politics that already had produced small schisms in that decade.

In 1925, even after having agreed with new elections for Grand Master, Mário Behring continued to occupy, provisionally, the post. At the same year, he renounced as Grand Master but remained in the post of Sovereign Great Commander, something legal according the statutes of the Supreme Council - altered in 1922, but registered only after almost 3 years, amid the mentioned situation - yet irregular according to the Grande Oriente do Brasil Constitutions[60].

To follow, it can be abridged[61], an intense exchange of opinions and insults occurred between the Grand Orient and the Supreme Council. In the year 1927 the schism occurred, with the Supreme Council declaring itself independent and bringing with it some disaffected groups that formed the independent State Grand Lodges. The Grande Loja da Bahia was formed some time before such developments and the one from Rio de Janeiro in the heat of the same events. Joining them soon was the Grande Loja de São Paulo, being these three Grand Lodges the first ones to receive warrants from the Supreme Council, that had started to act, by that time, as a Federate Grand Lodge as well. To understand the importance of regularity for masonic international relations, it is necessary to quote Castellani and Carvalho describing the end of this feud as follows: «On August 3rd 1927, Behring and his followers published a Manifest to the Lodges of the Scottish Rite in Brazil and the Decree nº7 - that became famous by the unusual attitude involved - declaring, officially, the Grand Orient as an irregular body within Universal Freemasonry. The unusual is an Obedience of the Scottish Higher Degrees to declare irregular an Obedience of the craft degrees. Even so, Behring didn't stop, since he promoted the schism, to court the United Grand Lodge of England, in the sense of obtaining from this body the recognition to his Grand Lodges, what would give them the traditional regularity emanated from the Obedience Mater»[62].

Mother Grand Lodge of the World

It became important to punctuate some issues present in this quote. First is the declaration of irregularityissued by the dissident Supreme Council, ahead it will be possible to understand that this discourse is frequent until the 1990s by splinter groups of the Grande Oriente do Brasil and from this obedience also against State Grande Lodges and State Independent Grand Orients. Secondly, there is the Mario Behring's "courting" England. In the archives of UGLE there is one formal Demand of Recognition after the schism, it comes from the Grande Loja da Paraíba[63]. Nonetheless, letters show an intense and unsolicited exchange of envoys to demand recognition amid the UGLE's preoccupations regarding the situation of English Freemasons in Brazil[64]. Thirdly, the nomenclature, nowadays accepted and promoted by the United Grand Lodge of England is that of "Obedience Mater" or "Mother Grand Lodge" and equivalents.

The epithet, far from being some deference, shows the subordination that many obediences fostered towards England. However, such classification wasn't part of the English discourse until the late 1950s. It was in 1958 when the English Grand Master Lord Scarbrough returning from a trip to the United States and Canada, was dazzled with the treatment dispensed to the UGLE, as transcribed and evidenced James W. Daniel quoting the, then, Grand Master "The so-called Mother Grand Lodge of the world is held in some estimation by our fellow Masons in Canada and the US' and concluded that 'we all of us have a great responsibility to see that that opinion should always remain justified" [65]. The vacillation in using the term "Mother Grand Lodge of the World" will disappear in a few years, being incorporated to the English discourse in an apotheotic way, as it is shown by the words of the very Grand Master, Lord Scarbrough: «will once more have shown the whole Masonic world that the Unite Grand Lodge of England is prepared to stand fast to basic principles, and will never in any circumstances tolerate irregular Freemasonry or be tempted to lower the standards which we as the Mother Grand Lodge of the world seek to maintain»[66].

In 1935, due to the recent schism and to the fragile situation of the English lodges under the Grand Council of Craft Masonry in Brazil, the Grande Oriente do Brazil and the United Grand Lodge of England celebrated a Treaty that would calm anxieties on both sides. The GOB was restless with the recent schism that generated the State Grand Lodges and watched these bodies, under the leadership of the Supreme Council of the Scottish Rite, to attempting seek recognition by their own merits or by undermining the GOB's reputation. The UGLE, in turn, had since the beginning of the 20th century tried to put the English lodges in Brazil under their direct protection. Also, they were trying to get rid of the numerous conflicts in Brazilian freemasonry.

The Treaty celebrated in 1935 settled the question of the sole recognition of the Grande Oriente do Brasil as the regular obedience in Brazilian territory in its 2º article[67] and in its 5º article, dug a gap in the GOB Constitution, thus making the installation of a District Grand Lodge in Brazil possible. Since Argentina had a District Grand Lodge of South America, the UGLE split the jurisdictions making the Brazilian one the District Grand Lodge of South America - Northern Division and its Argentinian counterpart, the Southern Division/one.

In 1937 the President of the Brazilian Republic, Getúlio Vargas, taking advantage of the internal and external political environment, dissolved the Congress, decreed a state of emergence, abolished the Constitution and proclaimed the establishment of the "Estado Novo". Because of the new nationalist ideology, freemasonry was prohibited and all the obediences had to close their doors. The involvement of Brazil in the Second World War postponed any chance of revival of freemasonry activities in Brazil. These circumstances were even worse for foreigners, now under suspicion and surveillance. The situation would be normalized only in 1946 with the election of a new president, Gen. Eurico Gaspar Dutra.

The incorporation of the discourse of primate of world freemasonry by the United Grand Lodge of England served, from 1960s onwards, as a guarantee of the prevalence of its interests. The quote was due to the prohibition of visitation between freemasons of the United Grand Lodge of England and Grand Alpine Lodge of Switzerland, that according reports, had recognized the Grand Lodge of France[68]. The prohibition aim was "To protect the integrity of members of the English Constitution"[69] and to "prevent the risk of their meeting in Lodge members of an irregular body" [70].

England's preoccupation, by its turn, extended beyond European territory. The Brazilian situation was followed closely, always with some annoyance towards the practices in Latin America, regarding them as being one step from irregularity. Such disapproval became clear in an English evaluation on the reports of the Grande Oriente do Brasil in 1950, the appraiser writes "Through the whole book there are several references to the fact that the Grand Orient has been recognized by the Grand Lodge of England, a fact of which this body is not a little proud"[71].

Although the English obedience repels any involvement of its lodges or recognised bodies in matters of politics or religion, in Brazil the 60s went by without any major concerns. Even when Brazilian political turmoil reached its peak when a coup deposed the elected President João Goulart and threw Brazil into a twenty-year military dictatorship. The military regime arrested, extensively tortured, killed and made disappear thousands of people.

In the English archives, there are substantial proofs of the attachment and support of the Grande Oriente do Brasil tothe military regime. Thus, in that very moment in which freemasonry could be used as a guardian of civility and dialogue, like during the Falklands War[72], some Brazilian freemasons chose to politically radicalize their stance under the silent consent of those who could have "protected the integrity" of freemasonry and its values.

The schism of 1973, the raising of the State Grand Orients and the battle for regularity

It is unsurprising that another schism occurs in 1973 within Brazilian freemasonry, once again ignited by controversial elections. The severity of this schism is due to the atmosphere of betrayal that encroached lodges, mainly the ones in São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro. Numerous purges were related to personal differences, the kind that is easily manifested in climates of political repression. One of these accusations of "communist infiltration", during the military regime, became a police-military investigation in 1970 due to a newsletter (nº 155-V-15) from the Grande Oriente de São Paulo - federated to the Grande Oriente do Brasil - for bringing between monthly ephemerides the centenary of Lenin and the 150th years of Engels birth [73].

The Grand Master defended himself by quoting, among other things, a obsequious document produced by the Grand Oriente do Brasil called "The thinking of Brazilian Freemasonry on the relevance of the Armed Forces on the defence of the Democratic Regime". Nonetheless the process went on and the Nacional Service of Information kept, for quite some time, its "all seeing eye" on Brazilian Freemasonry[74].

The practical reasons for the 1973's schism were, once more, due to dissatisfaction with the electoral process, that was, to say the least, suspect, since among other extravagances the votes were verified (as their validity) after the elections, causing enormous distortion on the "raw" numbers. Thus, that same year, ten State Grand Orients disaffiliated from the Grande Oriente do Brasil, formed the College of

Grand Masters of Brazilian Freemasonry, that in 1991 became the Confederação Maçônica do Brasil (COMAB).

Still in the 1970s the Confederação de Maçonaria Simbólica do Brasil (CSMB), was seeking a joint recognition of its represented Grand Lodges, trying to prove to the United Grand Lodge of England that they were regular and recommending a thesis, attached to a letter, called "The Freemasonry and the Territorial Law" [75]. In that same decade, the mentioned State Grand Lodges from CSMB joined the Confederación Masónica Interamericana (CMI) that had started to represent them in some international occasions. The coexistence between Grande Oriente do Brasil and the State Grande Lodges began to be threatened by series of intrigues related to personal differences, black books and a newsletter from CMI that classified the GOB as irregular[76].

Also in the 1970's, the GOB reinforced its artillery to show the worthiness of its regularity, using for this purpose a common masonic bodies' strategy at that time: proving the irregularity of its competitors. Kurt Prober, owner of a vast masonic biography and bibliography in Brazil, then wrote two booklets to explain the situation and, in turn, prove the irregularity of the CMI and any association with such confederation. The booklet "The Grande Oriente do Brasil and the Confederations C.M.I and C.M.S.B." is eloquent and answers the notes made by the Confederaciómn de la Masonería Interamericana towards the GOB, mainly the ones related to the United Grand Lodge of England and possibly creating could bias in the judgement of the English body when analysing the case. So, writes Prober: «Maliciously, the C.M.I. e its sister organization C.M.S.B. proclaim that United Grand Lodge of England recognizes the Grande Oriente do Brasil just because it "tolerates" the so-called "INVASION" of the Brazilian territory. But they overtly forget that, just to quote some examples, that the Grand Lodge of Scotland maintain LODGES in CHILEAND PERU for more than 100 years, some of them, and that in ARGENTINA there are around 30 ENGLISH lodges and seems to me that these THREE COUNTRIES are from [Grand] lodges "linked" to the C.M.I. (Mexican). In the rest of the world the situation is analogous»[77].

The Interamerican Confederation reappears in the archives of the United Grand Lodge of England in a confidential report of 23rd September, 1992, from the District Grand Master of Gibraltar and Lusitania. In his report, he relates that when participating in the celebrations of the 275 years of the UGLE he had stayed in the same hotel than the representative from the CMI. This person would had given him a brief account that "due to an accident of history the only Brazilian Grand Lodge recognized by the United Grand Lodge of England is the 'irregular' Grand Orient"[78]. The same representative would have asked the author of the letter to intercede with the English body, in this matter he was advised to send a report that was attached to the mentioned correspondence. After the analysis of such report, the Grand Lodge produced a statemen, of which it is worth to highlight the first point "1. From the papers supplied by the [emissary of the letter] the problem appears to be the usual Latin one of who has authority Grand Lodges/Orients or Supreme Councils"[79].

In the 1990s the reports about the UGLE's foreign relations show that these questions were consider to be, according James W. Daniel, in his introduction about this decade, "a log-jam was broken in Brazil", without give further details[80]. However, during this same decade England adopts an understanding that would be pivotal to the pacification of Brazilian Freemasonry of the day, regarding the ruling of shared territory. "The rule is better stated as a preference for recognising one Grand Lodge per territory, but permitting the recognition of two (or more) if they agree to share jurisdiction" [81].

This rule lead way for the first recognition of a Grand Lodge formed by the schism of 1927. In 1999 one of the twenty-seven State Grand Lodges, the São Paulo one, was recognized as regular by the United Grand Lodge of England[82]. Nonetheless, it can be noticed that, as a deference, the masonic obediences desiring such recognition should obtain the approval of the Grande Oriente do Brasil[83]. Until 2017, six Brazilian bodies were recognized as regular by the United Grand Lodge of England: Grande Oriente do Brasil, Grande Loja do Estado do Espírito Santo, Grande Loja do Estado do Mato Grosso do Sul, Grande Loja do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Grande Loja do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul e Grande Loja do Estado de São Paulo[84].

From the 1990s to 2014 most of the forty-nine Brazilian bodies permitted and encouraged visitation, what was translated into concrete masonic (building of temples, ritualistic dinners) and charity events. However, since this year the Grande Oriente do Brasil lodges are prohibited[85] from receiving any mason from a lodge which is not mentioned in the List of Lodges, this time the American one. One freemason from the GOB filed a writ of mandamus on the Federal Masonic Supreme Court, it was denied by a sentence with questionable historical arguments[86].

New ramifications on regularity and recognition are on the agenda of all Brazilian obediences and on the English one. In 2016, out of the fourty-nine regular Brazilian bodies, thirty-three are part of the Confederación Masónica Interamericana (CMI) [87], a sign that international consultation can be a privileged locus to the debate of broader questions, such as regularity. However, the questions of present history go beyond the aim of this article.

Final Considerations

To talk about masonic international relations between England and Brazil, is dealing in the case of the former, necessarily, with an economic power that still brings the habitus of imperialism, be it subliminally in the narrative of its history and institutions, or directly, in the manner of conducting its interests. In the Brazilian case the heritage of a recent colonial past can be observed in its needs to be recognised as something derived from the "original" and its craving for such approval.

What can be noticed in the history of regular Brazilian Freemasonry's schisms are the following characteristics: the tradition of fraudulent elections, disregard for basic democratic rules, autocracy, cronyism and the involvement with political bikering. In addition, there was an attempt to consolidate the federal form of organization that ended up creating, as in the Empire and later in the Republic, an appearance of unity, which in the end only caused a concentration of power in the centre.

Analysing the dossiers at the United Grand Lodge of England, it can be observed that even without formal relations, several Brazilian masonic bodies tried to maintain correspondence with the UGLE. Those dossiers are comprised of loose papers coming from Brazil. It is a correspondence that addresses a variety of issues, sent by several potencies, even that such proceedings occurred in a unilateral way (i.e. with no answer from the UGLE). There are charts, reports, list of lodges of non-recognised bodies (Grand Lodges and Grand Orients) that through these documents that recognised the regularity of the English obedience without receiving any recognition in return. Certainly, this practice, mainly the one of sending the documents known as "Demand of Recognition" empower the United Grand Lodge of England in a way that reinforces its status as "central power" of world freemasonry.

The distance that the UGLE maintained from the Brazilian freemasonry after 1935 can be interpreted as a coherent, although multi-layered, position. First, it is in line with the pragmatism that guided the United Grand Lodge of England through its, almost, three hundred years of history. Real freemasonry for UGLE is solely English Freemasonry and its works. It can recognize, open concessions, celebrate treaties, admire the differences but they are profoundly fond of their system that - due to the motives hereby exposed - will always be regarded as "the original", no matter how recent they are. Secondly, the different nature of freemasonry in England and in Brazil. After the Union Treaty of 1813, English Freemasonry became more and more a gentleman's club, sometimes more inclined to being esoteric than political. On the other hand, in Brazil, freemasonry was part of the process of constructing the nation, it promoted important changes in the country (abolition of slavery, republican movement, etc.) and after the 60's plunged into a more passive role, that of supporting the government, as long as it ruled for the elites. The third aspect is the international aspect of UGLE. With District Grand Lodges in all continents and the daily arrival of Demands of Recognition, there is little time to keep track of the situation in every country. The fact that the Library and Museum of Freemasonry holds so many records of several other Grand Lodges, it's an accomplishment for the Craft and its researchers.

The United Grand Lodge of England has been adapting to its new role in the world, like England has as a country. Prior to the fall of the Empire, the English body was remodelling its relations, trying at the same time to both defend what it understands as the original freemasonry while preserving its zones of influence. The regularity discourse was the cornerstone of a great part of its relations. In the gasps of the 19th century, like History itself, the history of freemasonry became more analytical and less metaphysical, its tradition should be traceable, preferably to England without any more legends or "time immemorial" that could allow for a common heritage.

In conclusion, although masonic obediences wish to list requisites to regularity, there is not a canonical form for it. It is seen that regularity and recognition can be plasticized, thus history may be "reinterpreted" in name of political convenience, momentarily or permanently. It is perceived that historical arguments are the touchstone of the flexibilization or the hardening of such relations. Assuredly, the reduced number of historians and other professional social scientists within masonic bodies, or involved in its discussions, makes this argumentative adaptability possible, which curiously, it has done in the name of tradition.

Sources

Library and Museum of Freemasonry, United Grand Lodge of England, London

Brazil - Historical Correspondence

Brazil - Files

Agreement between the Grand Lodge of England and the Grand Orient of Brazil

Grand Orient of Brazil 1912-1935 - Files

Arquivo do Estado de São Paulo

Projeto Memória Política e Resistência

Bibliography

America, Masonic Grand Lodge Secretaries in North. "List of Lodges." Conference of the Masonic Grand Lodge Secretaries in North America. Pantagraph Printing and Stationary Company. 2015.

Aslan, Nicola. "O enigma da gênese da maçonaria especulativa." Formação histórica da maçonaria: Anais do I Congresso Internacional de História e Geografia. Rio de Janeiro, 1981.

Barata, Alexandre Mansur. Maçonaria, Sociabilidade Ilustrada e Independência do Brasil (1790-1822). Juiz de Fora/São Paulo: Editora UFJF, Annablume, FAPESP, 2006.

Belton, John. The English Masonc Union of 1813: a tale antient and modern. Suffolk: Arima Publishing, 2012.

Brodsky, Michel. "The Regular Freemason: A short history of masonic regularity." Ars Quatuor Coronatorum (1994): 103-121.

Brooking, R.A. Brazilian Freemasonry: Notes and Pictures. Rio de Janeiro: [s.n], 1930

Castellani, José e William Almeida de Carvalho. História do Grande Oriente do Brasil: A Maçonaria na História do Brasil. São Paulo: Madras, 2009.

Daniel, James W. "UGLE's External Relations 1950-2000: policy and practice." Ars Quatuor Coronatorum (2005): 1-47.

______________. "The Rise and Fall of Empires: Britain's & UGLE's compared." Ars Quatuor Coronatorum (2013): 223-248.

Genz, Plínio Virgílio. A Maçonaria Inglesa no Brasil (2013).

Goff, Jacques Le. História e Memória. Campinas: Editora da Unicamp, 1990.

Gonçalves, Thiago Werneck. "Periodismo maçônico e cultura política na corte imperial brasileira (1871-1874)." Dissertação de mestrado em História,Universidade Federal Fluminense, 2012.

Haffner, Christopher. "Regularity of Origin." Ars Quatuor Coronatorum (1984): 11-128.

Hamill, John. The Craft: a history of English Freemasonry. London: Crucible, 1986.

Hobsbawm, E.J.; Ranger, Terence. The invention of tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983.

Kenyo Ismail, "A colonização maçônica inglesa: na contramão dos princípios maçônicos", No Esquadro, 1 de setembro de 2014, citado em 27 de abril de 2016. https://www.noesquadro.com.br/2014/09/colonizacao-maconica-inglesa-na-contramao-dos-principios-maconicos.html

Jessica Harland-Jacobs. Builders of Empire: Freemasonry and British Imperialism: 1717-1927. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2007.

Jacob, Margaret. The Origins of Freemasonry: Facts and Fictions. Philadelphia: University of Pennsyvania Press, 2006.

_____________. Living the Enlightenment: freemasonry and politics in eighteen century Europe. New York: Oxford Universuty Press, 1991.

Kerr, Robert Malcom. The Commentaries on the Laws of England of Sir William Blackstone, Vol.1. London: John Murray,1876

Marx, Karl. O Capital: Crítica da Economia Política. São Paulo: Editora Nova Cultural, 1996.

Pires, Joaquim da Silva. A cisão maçônica de 1927. Curitiba: Editora A Trolha, 2015.

Prober, Kurt. O Grande Oriente do Brasil e as Confederações C.M.I. e C.M.S.B. Rio de Janeiro, 1976.

Snoek, Jan A.M. e Henrik Bogdan. Handbook of Freemasonry. Leiden: Brill, 2015.

Stevenson, David. The origins of Freemasonry: Scotland's century, 1590-1710. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.

Stillson, Henry Leonard (ed.). History of the Ancient and Honorable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons, and Concordant Orders. Boston & New York: The Fraternity Publishing Company, 1906.

United Grand Lodge of England. "Information for the Guidance of Members of the Craft." London: United Grand Lodge of England, 2014.

[1] PhD Candidate, University of Bristol. Supported by CAPES Foundation (Coordiantion for Higher Education Staff Development), Brazil.

[2] A Portuguese version of this text was previously published at the Revista de Estudios Historicos de la Masonería Latinoamericana y Caribeña (REHMLAC) in its number 1, volume 8 (May 2016 - November 2016). I thank Sylvia Hottinger who proofread this text and made valuable contributions, although I'm responsible for the remaining errors or imprecisions. I also thank Ricardo Martinez Esquivel whom promptly authorised the re-issue of this article.

[3] Jessica Harland-Jacobs. Builders of the Empire: Freemasons and British Imperialism (1717-1927) (North Carolina, 2007)

[4] Margaret Jacob. Living the Enlightenment: Freemasonry and Politics in Eighteen Century Europe (New York, 1991).

[5] Alcebiades Laspas. "Algumas revelações sobre os inícios da maçonaria no Brasil". Formação histórica da maçonaria: Anais do I Congresso Internacional de História e Geografia. (Rio de Janeiro, 1981) pp. 63-80

[6] Alexandre Mansur Barata. Maçonaria, sociabilidade ilustrada e independência do Brasil (1790-1822). (Juiz de Fora/São Paulo, 2006).

[7] Jacques Le Goff. História e Memória. (Campinas: Editora da Unicamp, 1990), 548 (my translation)

[8] As shown by the studies of Brodsky (1993) and Daniel (2003; 2013).

[9] Referring to the concept of "invention of tradition" in Eric J. Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger. The invention of tradition (Cambridge, 1983).

[10] Jan A.M. Snoek e Henrik Bogdan, The Handbook of Freemasonry (Leiden: Brill, 2015), 1.

[11] Referring to the adjective, not the supporter of liberalism.

[12] Jean-Michel Merle and Michel Viot. « Le Grand Architecte de l'Univers ». Yves-Noël Lelouvier (ed) Notre Histoire: La Franc-Maçonnerie. (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1996), pp.27-41.

[13] https://www.cmsb.org.br (Accessed in 28th March, 2017)

[14] https://www.comab.org.br (Accessed in 28th March, 2017)

[15] Two examples that illustrate and reassure this statement are the American List of Lodges and the list of Foreign Grand Lodges recognized by the United Grand Lodge of England. Both lists are the major source for the verification of regularity in Brazil. On the English list five masonic bodies are recognized, while in the American List of Lodges twenty-eight obediences.

[16] www.ugle.org.uk/about (acessado em 5 de Fevereiro, 2016).

[17] I'm referring, more specifically to The Grand Lodge of the Most Ancient and Honourable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons, established 1751; and the Grand Lodge of England, allegedly established 1717. Worth mention is that the "Antients" were a newer obedience than the "Moderns", however the designation engendered by the "Antients Grand Lodge" was the one that perpetuates.

[18] John Belton, The English Masonic Union of 1813: A tale antient and modern (Suffolk: Arima Publishing, 2012); United Grand Lodge of England, Memorials of the Masonic Union (Leicester: Johnson, Wykes & Paine, 1913).

[19] Information for the Guidance of Members of the Craft (London: United Grand Lodge, 2014), 7.

[20] Christopher Haffner, "Regularity of Origin", Ars Quatuor Coronatorum 96 (1984): 11-128.

[21] Michel Brodsky, "The Regular Freemason: A short history of masonic regularity", Ars Quatuor Coronatorum 106 (1994): 103-121.

[22] Haffner, Regulairy of Origin,126-127.

[23] For a panomarama of this discussion: Hamill (1986), Stevenson (1988) e Jacob (2006).

[24] The reference to freemasonry as a plethora of organisations is from Bogdan and Snoek, Handbook of Freemasonry, 1.

[25] Jacob Gorender presenting Karl Marx, O Capital: Crítica da Economia Política (São Paulo: Editora Nova Cultural, 1996), 25. (my translation)

[26] Information..., 7.

[27] Robert Malcom Kerr. The Commentaries on the Laws of England of Sir William Blackstone, Vol.1. (London: John Murray,1876), 447.

[28] The Constitutions of the Free-Masons wrote by the writer and Reverend James Anderson is divided in 3 parts, the first brings the story of the Order, quite stepped on the mythical narrative of the Old Charges, the second part brings specifically the obligations of the freemasons, sort of code of conduct, inside and outside the lodges and lastly the administrative rules.

[29] I thank Andrew Prescott who sent me his joint recent study, that cross references data about the places mentioned in Andersons's accounts and shows that the 24th June 1717 foundational meeting was probably created to meet the needs of the Grand Lodge of London and Westminster in the early 1730s. Andrew Prescott and Susan Sommers. Searching for the Apple Tree: Revisiting the Earliest Years of English Organized Freemasonry (in press, 2017).

[30] Nicola Aslan made this comment on the lack of documents about the 24th June 1717 events. Aslan, Nicola, "O enigma da gênese da maçonaria especulativa", em Formação Histórica da Maçonaria: Anais do I Congresso Internacional de História e Geografia (Rio de Janeiro: março de 1981), I volume, 24-53.

[31] The four lodges that were gathered, according Anderson, took their names from the Pubs in which they met, they were the Goose and Gridiron, Crown, Rummer and Grapes and Apple Tree Tavern.

[32] James Anderson. The New Book of Constitutions of the Antient and Honourable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Mason. (London: Caesar Ward & Richard Chandler Booksellers, 1738), p.109

[33] I'm referring, specially to the Wigan and York Grand Lodges.

[34] I use the term incorporation to talk about the Antients Grand Lodge since the discourse of its irregularity remains until today in several official and unofficial documents of the United Grand Lodge of England.

[35] Ritualistic nomenclature by which "non-freemasons" are designated.

[36] The Grande Oriente (Nacional) Brasileioro was known, briefly because its location, asGrand Orient of the Santo Antonio Street. In: R.A. Brooking. Brazilian Freemasonry: Notes and Pictures. (Rio de Janeiro: [s.n], 1930), 24.

[37] "Letter from the Grand Lodge to the Grand Orient", Copy from Grand Lodge Letter Book 6, 363 (Brazil - Files) London: Library and Museum of Freemasonry.

[38] "Admiral da Mota, Gr. Orient of Brazil - 10th January 1880 - Seeks recognition of his Gr. Lodge - Approval notified to Adm. da Mota 30th January 1880" - (Brazil - Historical Correspondence) London: Library and Museum of Freemasonry.

[39] Admiral Artur Silveira da Mota, Baron of Jacegui, was a military and diplomat od the Brazilian Empire, becoming a Republican leader afterwards. He was interim Grand Master of the Grande Oriente do Brasil from 29th September 1881 to 5th May 1882.

[40] Such deed was recently celebrated by the Grande Oriente do Brasil on the centenary of the Admiral's demise. According the Decree nº164 of 21th January, 2014 "intercedeu pessoalmente junto ao Grão-Mestre da Grande Loja Unida da Inglaterra, e logrou êxito, para que o Grande Oriente do Brasil fosse reconhecido, na mesma ocasião, tornou-se representante daquela Grande Loja junto ao Grande Oriente do Brasil, oportunidade em que, na condição de emissário desse Grande Oriente, concedeu o título de Membro Honorário ao príncipe de Gales"

[41] This is the specific name of the document in which a Grand Lodge asks to be recognized as regular.

[42] Although the "Basic Priniples for Grand Lodge Recognition" had been organized in a single document just in 1929, they were applied, somehow, in a costumary way by the UGLE. On the 1929's wording: "That the Grand Lodge shall have sovereign jurisdiction over the Lodges under its control; i.e. that it shall be a responsible, independent, self-governing organisation, with sole and undisputed authority over the Craft or Symbolic Degrees (Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft, and Master Mason) within its Jurisdiction; and shall not in any way be subject to, or divide such authority with, a Supreme Council or other Power claiming any control or supervision over those degrees.". "Basic Principles for Grand Lodge Recognition", in Information for the Guidance of Members of the Craft (London: United Grand Lodge, 2013), 7. [added griffons].

[43] Thiago Werneck Gonçalves. "Periodismo Maçônico e Cultura Política na Corte Imperial Brasileira (1871-1874)" (Dissertation, M.Phil in History, Universidade Federal Fluminense, 2012), 103. (my translation)

[44] [There is in fact no representative at the Grand Lodge of England of the Grand Orient of Brasil, and the nominal representative of the Grand Lodge of England at the Grand Orient of Brazil is probably no longer alive, although no intimation to that effect has yet been received] 27th September 1912,Letter from the Grand Secretary to F. H. Chevallier Boutell, Copy from the Grand Lodge Letter Book 75, 140/145 (Brazil - Files) London: Library and Museum of Freemasonry.

[45] "Grande Oriente do Brasil" - [Transcriptions made by E. Cromack OSM]. (Brazil - Files) London: Library and Museum of Freemasonry.

[46] Letter from the Grand Secretary to F.H. Chevallier Boutell. Dated 27th September 1912. Copy from the Grand Lodge Letter Book Nº75 - pp. 140/145. (Brazil - Files) London: Library and Museum of Freemasonry.

[47] There are a few, but important, differences between the Portuguese and the English versions of the treaty, what would lead to other misunderstandings in the future.

[48] Shelf - Safe (U) Nº 18.273 - Agreement between the Grand Lodge of England and the Grand Orient of Brazil, dated 20th December 1912 - (Brazil - Files) London: Library and Museum of Freemasonry.

[49] The number thirty-three possesses special significance to the practitioners of the Scottish Rite, since it is comprised of thirty-three degrees. To stablish the number of thirty-three members to the high administration of another rite, as the York Rite, shows the confuse relation between craft masonry and higher degrees, existent in the Grande Oriente do Brasil at that time.

[50] Shelf - Safe (U) Nº 18.273 - Agreement between the Grand Lodge of England and the Grand Orient of Brazil, dated 20th December 1912 - (Brazil - Files) London: Library and Museum of Freemasonry.

[51] "Letter to Bro. Songhurst, 6th December 1922" (Brazil - Files) London: Library and Museum of Freemasonry.

[52] Plínio Virgílio Genz. A Maçonaria Inglesa no Brasil. (São Paulo: Madras, 2013) pp.59-90.

[53] José Castellani e William Almeida de Carvalho, História do Grande Oriente do Brasil: A Maçonaria na História do Brasil (São Paulo: Madras, 2009), 179.

[54] Surely the schisms of 1927 and 1973 had several external variables that can help to comprehend such ruptures. However, the schisms are relevant to this article since they originated other masonic bodies, modifying the Brazilian masonic panorama and causing new questions towards regularity.

[55] Joaquim da Silva Pires, A cisão maçônica de 1927 (Curitiba: Editora A Trolha, 2015), 95.

[56] Castellani e Carvalho, História do Grande Oriente do Brasil, 189; Pires, A cisão maçônica de 1927, 116-117.

[57] The name of these entities, the number of degrees and the extent of autonomy that they have, vary per rite and country in which is practiced.

[58] Josiah H. Drummond. "Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry" in History of the Ancient and Honorable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons, and Concordant Orders, ed. Henry Leonard Stillsin (Boston & New York: The Fraternity Publishing Company, 1906),801

[59] "Letter to Bro. Songhurst, 6th December 1922". (Brazil - Files) London: Library and Museum of Freemasonry.

[60]Pires, A cisão maçônica de 1927, 124.

[61]Although the particulars of such case are extremely interesting to comprehend the understanding of regularity to each group, there is no space in this article to tackle this affair.

[62] Castellani e Carvalho, História do Grande Oriente do Brasil, 197. (my translation)

[63] Grande Loja da Paraíba - Explainable letter, demand of recognition (18 Aug. 1933)" (Brazil - Files) London: Library and Museum of Freemasonry.

[64] Box "Grande Oriente do Brasil 1912-1935" - (Brazil - Files) London: Library and Museum of Freemasonry.

[65] James W. Daniel, "UGLE's External Relations 1950-2000: policy and practice", Ars Quatuor Coronatorum 117 (2005): 1- 47, 7

[66] Daniel, "UGLE's External Relations 1950-2000: policy and practice", 12 [added griffons]

[67] Plínio Virgílio Genz. A Maçonaria Inglesa no Brasil. (São Paulo, 2013) p.95

[68] The Grand Lodge of France was created in 1894, like the Grand Oriente of France was adogmatic. The former binding the reference to the "Great Architect of the Universe" but there is no imposition of any belief. So, at the Grand Lodge of France there was deits, theists, agnostics and atheists.

[69] Daniel. "UGLE's External Relations 1950-2000: policy and practice", 11.

[70] Daniel. "UGLE's External Relations 1950-2000: policy and practice", 11.

[71] "Transactions of the Grand Orient of Brazil" 18th August 1950 (Brazil - Files) London: Library and Museum of Freemasonry.

[72]James W. Daniel. "UGLE's External Relations 1950-2000: policy and practice", 20.

[73] Castelani e Carvalho, História do Grande Oriente do Brasil, 251.

[74] Loja Maçônica Brasileira (Departamento de Ordem Política e Social - Santos, 1975-1982)Arquivo Público do Estado de São Paulo. BR_SP_APESP_DEOPS_SAN_P008721_01.

[75] "Carta da CMSB para a Grande Loja Unida da Inglaterra" Brasília, 19 de fevereiro de 1971 (Brazil - Files) London: Library and Museum of Freemasonry.

[76] Kurt Prober, "O Grande Oriente do Brasil e as Confederações C.M.I. e C.M.S.B." (Rio de Janeiro: Ed. Própria do autor, 1976), 4.

[77] Kurt Prober, "O Grande Oriente do Brasil e as Confederações C.M.I. e C.M.S.B.", 27 [Griffons and spelling from the author].

[78] "Private and Confidential; from the Grand Master of the District Grand Lodge of Gibraltar and Lusitania to the Grand Secretary of the United Grand Lodge of England" (23rd September 1992) (Brazil - Files) London: Library and Museum of Freemasonry.

[79] "Brazil- short form" (2nd October 1992) (Brazil - Files) London: Library and Museum of Freemasonry.

[80] Daniel, "UGLE's External Relations 1950-2000: policy and practice", 21.

[81] Proceedings [11 March 1992] apud Daniel, "UGLE's External Relations 1950-2000: policy and practice", 24.

[82] Daniel, "UGLE's External Relations 1950-2000: policy and practice", 34

[83]Daniel, "UGLE's External Relations 1950-2000: policy and practice", 34. Highlights that the recognition of the Grande Loja do Estado de São Paulo occured just after the Grande Oriente do Brasil recognizes the first obedience (sic) from the State Grand Lodges system.

[84] https://www.ugle.org.uk/about/foreign-grand-lodges (accessed in 31st March 2017)

[85] Grande Oriente do Brasil, Prancha 236/2014 - GGMG (Brasília, 15 de agosto de 2014)

[86] For a transcription of the document https://bibliot3ca.wordpress.com/2015/02/10/posicao-do-gob-em-relacao-a-regularidade-e-direito-de-visitacao-2015/

[87] Among them the Grande Oriente do Brasil. Confederación Masónica Interamericana "Lista de GGPP" https://www.cmisecretariaejecutiva.org/jst3/es/institucional/lista-ggpp (Acessado em 12 Fevereiro, 2015)