Apr 3, 2023·edited Apr 3, 2023Liked by Cameron M. Bailey
In NC we require the background check. The investigation committee determines favorable or unfavorable depending on the circumstances of the report and the conversation with the man. Here is what I've found over the years. Not every one knows how to interpret a background check, some times they are wrong, sometimes petitioners lie and we would have not known otherwise. People who have served their time IMHO have paid their debts. Most important masonry isn't a path to reformation or some salvation. Finally, there are a lot, I mean a lot of men with a record, i mean a lot. I talked to a criminal defense attorney who told me no one is a Saint.
As a PM of a lodge that lost their temple due to massive theft by the TB treasurer......yes, background checks are a must. The TB treasurer had a previous conviction for financial skullduggery and that could have saved 5 lodges, 2 OES chapters and Rainbows, DeMolays etc from being losing their home of almost 50 years.
Yes, and yes. The West gate must be guarded. IMHO we should strive for excellence in our membership. Becoming and staying a Mason is a privilege, not a right, a reward for leading a good life. We have to draw the line somewhere, and "felonies" seems to be a reasonable line.
Apr 3, 2023·edited Apr 3, 2023Liked by Cameron M. Bailey
Background checks have proven invaluable in our jurisdiction (NY) and in some cases would have prevented much embarrassment if done years ago. {Obvious caveat: I am not speaking on behalf of Grand Lodge}
Having said that, I absolutely reject the notion that a felony should disqualify, given that we live in a police state in terms of criminalization and incarceration compared to any other nation in the world. You can literally end up with a felony by mistake for something trivial like having an extra television set attached to your cable. Heck, urination in public can put you on a sex offender registry for life in one state. And racial disparity of sentencing is a whole other issue we should not allow to influence our otherwise egalitarian Craft.
This is why we have an investigating committee. If a candidate is honest about a criminal record, we can judge whether or not it reflects an incurable moral defect. Are we going to exclude anyone who made a bad decision as a teen twenty years ago and are now a family man? As with anything ethical, context matters, and people can change. We all have a checquered pavement, whether or not we have a criminal record.
I say let secular law and records inform us, but leave judgement to the Craft.
When I was looking to rent a house, each landlord required a background check (that I had to pay upfront) just to be considered. There are systems in place where an organization like GL can provide a centralized place online that would receive the reports and could share them with the pertinent lodges, all paid for by the petitioner. I am always for reducing GL's power and influence over the blue lodges, but in this case, it would be much more cost effective to set this up in one place, instead of 180+ different organizations.
As far as the second question, if a brother commits a felony while in the fraternity, I'd certainly expect an expulsion, but it would (as others mentioned) depend on the circumstances.
I believe background check are necessary in these times. it's a very inexpensive and the prospects for Mansonic membership pays .it's not any guarantee but it will help us guard the west gates.
In today's environment, it is, unfortunately a necessary evil. How can we preach ethical behavior and conduct if there are people in our midst who would steal and cheat from us? How would it look to the outside world if hypocrisy enshrouds our craft? All the bad things people say about us would come piling back on top. We are a fraternity, not a den of thieves.
I think background checks are a great tool. As an organization where adults have opportunities to interact with youth programs, we should at least be checking to see if a candidate is a RSO or has sexually motivated crimes in their past. I would certainly also want to know if a candidate has financial crimes in their past. As far as whether a brother should be expelled if convicted of a felony class crime, should not the brother be afforded due process? Shouldn’t he at least be afforded a Masonic trial before being expelled. Don’t misunderstand me, I don’t think the brother should remain a part of the fraternity if convicted.
It was brought up in last night's Rummer and Grapes Zoom meeting - how many have actually seen a black cube in a vote? A few have, but in my 10 years, I've never seen it happen. It might be because at least partly, we're a military area, with two major navy bases nearby, and most of our candidates come from the military. In this area, I would think that being in the military might negate the requirement for a BG check.
Back ground checks are a good idea, Back ground checks don't tell you everything but they should be enough. Credit checks may be of similar use. Scoundrels can and do slip by because they are invisible. They are squeaky clean and seldom leave a trail, they have innocuous past and very little social history. Much in the same way a career politician will have a clean slate, such as no business failures or bankruptcies because they never had business etc. So yes to background checks but investigate the man.
Automatic expulsion? Absolutely not. We as Freemasons should decide such a thing. Suppose a brother was accused of a crime that was obviously trumped up. Supposed they were in a foreign land and tried on sham charges and tossed into prison for political reasons? Would we not want to examine the situation for ourselves? There are many cases right here at home where a man may find themselves pleading guilty to any number of things to protect their families, save their business, preserve their finances etc. I don't think abdicating our Masonic responsibilities to increasing doubtful civil authorities is a good idea or even Masonic. So no.
Background checks, yes...findings need to be reviewed at the Lodge level, taken case by case, then the investigations committee make their decision from their.
Back not to many years ago , the community and neighborhoods people new most everyone and it wasn't a problem of vetting a man , but it's not that way any longer even in smaller towns. so let's do our do diligence and guard our gates all of them including the south, west , east and the secretary and treasure gates .
On the first question: I am generally favorable but have some reservations. Most of the time there is no doubt about the petitioners rectitude or veracity. A blanket requirement would be totally unnecessary and perhaps demeaning. So I tend to believe it should not be a blanket requirement. Rather it should be suggested in cases where the petitioner is relatively unknown or there is something in his past that raises a question. I realize this brings an issue of "discrimination" - "why me and not him".
We need to inform every petitioner that we may conduct a background check but there should not be a blanket requirement that we do so on all petitioners.
On the second question: We have had two instances where the petitioner indicated that he had been arrested and convicted of a felony. In both cases we received details and evidence of his rehabilitation and sincere remorse. In both cases the petitioner got his three Masonic recommenders. In one case the petitioner moved away before we read the petition in Lodge in the second case the petitioner was given the degrees of Masonry and became a respected Master Mason. Trust and respect are the the core requirements of becoming and being a Mason. If a person that made a mistake in his early life has paid for it and is honest about it I believe we can trust and respect him. Thus I do not believe that a mistake made in early life and reconciled in later life needs to necessitate an automatic rejection.
The Tree of Life has two columns: Justice and Mercy. Masonry teaches us to take both into consideration before making judgment. Equilibrium, Balance. Remember the Golden Rule.
In NC we require the background check. The investigation committee determines favorable or unfavorable depending on the circumstances of the report and the conversation with the man. Here is what I've found over the years. Not every one knows how to interpret a background check, some times they are wrong, sometimes petitioners lie and we would have not known otherwise. People who have served their time IMHO have paid their debts. Most important masonry isn't a path to reformation or some salvation. Finally, there are a lot, I mean a lot of men with a record, i mean a lot. I talked to a criminal defense attorney who told me no one is a Saint.
As a PM of a lodge that lost their temple due to massive theft by the TB treasurer......yes, background checks are a must. The TB treasurer had a previous conviction for financial skullduggery and that could have saved 5 lodges, 2 OES chapters and Rainbows, DeMolays etc from being losing their home of almost 50 years.
Yes, and yes. The West gate must be guarded. IMHO we should strive for excellence in our membership. Becoming and staying a Mason is a privilege, not a right, a reward for leading a good life. We have to draw the line somewhere, and "felonies" seems to be a reasonable line.
Background checks have proven invaluable in our jurisdiction (NY) and in some cases would have prevented much embarrassment if done years ago. {Obvious caveat: I am not speaking on behalf of Grand Lodge}
Having said that, I absolutely reject the notion that a felony should disqualify, given that we live in a police state in terms of criminalization and incarceration compared to any other nation in the world. You can literally end up with a felony by mistake for something trivial like having an extra television set attached to your cable. Heck, urination in public can put you on a sex offender registry for life in one state. And racial disparity of sentencing is a whole other issue we should not allow to influence our otherwise egalitarian Craft.
This is why we have an investigating committee. If a candidate is honest about a criminal record, we can judge whether or not it reflects an incurable moral defect. Are we going to exclude anyone who made a bad decision as a teen twenty years ago and are now a family man? As with anything ethical, context matters, and people can change. We all have a checquered pavement, whether or not we have a criminal record.
I say let secular law and records inform us, but leave judgement to the Craft.
When I was looking to rent a house, each landlord required a background check (that I had to pay upfront) just to be considered. There are systems in place where an organization like GL can provide a centralized place online that would receive the reports and could share them with the pertinent lodges, all paid for by the petitioner. I am always for reducing GL's power and influence over the blue lodges, but in this case, it would be much more cost effective to set this up in one place, instead of 180+ different organizations.
As far as the second question, if a brother commits a felony while in the fraternity, I'd certainly expect an expulsion, but it would (as others mentioned) depend on the circumstances.
I believe background check are necessary in these times. it's a very inexpensive and the prospects for Mansonic membership pays .it's not any guarantee but it will help us guard the west gates.
In today's environment, it is, unfortunately a necessary evil. How can we preach ethical behavior and conduct if there are people in our midst who would steal and cheat from us? How would it look to the outside world if hypocrisy enshrouds our craft? All the bad things people say about us would come piling back on top. We are a fraternity, not a den of thieves.
I think background checks are a great tool. As an organization where adults have opportunities to interact with youth programs, we should at least be checking to see if a candidate is a RSO or has sexually motivated crimes in their past. I would certainly also want to know if a candidate has financial crimes in their past. As far as whether a brother should be expelled if convicted of a felony class crime, should not the brother be afforded due process? Shouldn’t he at least be afforded a Masonic trial before being expelled. Don’t misunderstand me, I don’t think the brother should remain a part of the fraternity if convicted.
It was brought up in last night's Rummer and Grapes Zoom meeting - how many have actually seen a black cube in a vote? A few have, but in my 10 years, I've never seen it happen. It might be because at least partly, we're a military area, with two major navy bases nearby, and most of our candidates come from the military. In this area, I would think that being in the military might negate the requirement for a BG check.
Back ground checks are a good idea, Back ground checks don't tell you everything but they should be enough. Credit checks may be of similar use. Scoundrels can and do slip by because they are invisible. They are squeaky clean and seldom leave a trail, they have innocuous past and very little social history. Much in the same way a career politician will have a clean slate, such as no business failures or bankruptcies because they never had business etc. So yes to background checks but investigate the man.
Automatic expulsion? Absolutely not. We as Freemasons should decide such a thing. Suppose a brother was accused of a crime that was obviously trumped up. Supposed they were in a foreign land and tried on sham charges and tossed into prison for political reasons? Would we not want to examine the situation for ourselves? There are many cases right here at home where a man may find themselves pleading guilty to any number of things to protect their families, save their business, preserve their finances etc. I don't think abdicating our Masonic responsibilities to increasing doubtful civil authorities is a good idea or even Masonic. So no.
Background checks, yes...findings need to be reviewed at the Lodge level, taken case by case, then the investigations committee make their decision from their.
Back not to many years ago , the community and neighborhoods people new most everyone and it wasn't a problem of vetting a man , but it's not that way any longer even in smaller towns. so let's do our do diligence and guard our gates all of them including the south, west , east and the secretary and treasure gates .
On the first question: I am generally favorable but have some reservations. Most of the time there is no doubt about the petitioners rectitude or veracity. A blanket requirement would be totally unnecessary and perhaps demeaning. So I tend to believe it should not be a blanket requirement. Rather it should be suggested in cases where the petitioner is relatively unknown or there is something in his past that raises a question. I realize this brings an issue of "discrimination" - "why me and not him".
We need to inform every petitioner that we may conduct a background check but there should not be a blanket requirement that we do so on all petitioners.
On the second question: We have had two instances where the petitioner indicated that he had been arrested and convicted of a felony. In both cases we received details and evidence of his rehabilitation and sincere remorse. In both cases the petitioner got his three Masonic recommenders. In one case the petitioner moved away before we read the petition in Lodge in the second case the petitioner was given the degrees of Masonry and became a respected Master Mason. Trust and respect are the the core requirements of becoming and being a Mason. If a person that made a mistake in his early life has paid for it and is honest about it I believe we can trust and respect him. Thus I do not believe that a mistake made in early life and reconciled in later life needs to necessitate an automatic rejection.
The Tree of Life has two columns: Justice and Mercy. Masonry teaches us to take both into consideration before making judgment. Equilibrium, Balance. Remember the Golden Rule.