I’ve often wondered if the first two degrees shouldn’t be similar to a probation period. That after being initiated, and prior to receiving the Third Degree, a vote of the members to allow the brother to move forward, to maintain the integrity of the fraternity when someone slips through.
I’ve often wondered if the first two degrees shouldn’t be similar to a probation period. That after being initiated, and prior to receiving the Third Degree, a vote of the members to allow the brother to move forward, to maintain the integrity of the fraternity when someone slips through.
This can be done now, if a Lodge feels it is needed.
I won't give any details to avoid any possible embarrassment but in one of my Lodges (I belong to four) we have a Brother who's advance was stopped quite a few years ago. The Lodge initiated him, and then troubling behavior exhibited itself. It was decided by the Lodge on witnessing it that he was unsuited to the Degree of Master Mason.
So he was not given the next Degrees.
I don't know how this practice is codified in other Jurisdictions, but it Washington it is outlined in 20.04BL, Washington Masonic Code, Objection to Advancement.
In short, quoting 20.02BL: "Any member of a Lodge has the right to object to the initiation or advancement of a candidate."
My hunch is that Masonry would be better served if this tool were utilized more often as needed, as a part of more vigorous attempts to guard the West Gate.
One more quick thought: In some foreign jurisdictions it takes much longer to move through the Degrees than it does in the typical US Lodge. Requiring at least a year between the Degrees is not uncommon. I've often thought that the slower process would be better for our Lodges, and for the candidate himself.
I’ve often wondered if the first two degrees shouldn’t be similar to a probation period. That after being initiated, and prior to receiving the Third Degree, a vote of the members to allow the brother to move forward, to maintain the integrity of the fraternity when someone slips through.
This can be done now, if a Lodge feels it is needed.
I won't give any details to avoid any possible embarrassment but in one of my Lodges (I belong to four) we have a Brother who's advance was stopped quite a few years ago. The Lodge initiated him, and then troubling behavior exhibited itself. It was decided by the Lodge on witnessing it that he was unsuited to the Degree of Master Mason.
So he was not given the next Degrees.
I don't know how this practice is codified in other Jurisdictions, but it Washington it is outlined in 20.04BL, Washington Masonic Code, Objection to Advancement.
In short, quoting 20.02BL: "Any member of a Lodge has the right to object to the initiation or advancement of a candidate."
My hunch is that Masonry would be better served if this tool were utilized more often as needed, as a part of more vigorous attempts to guard the West Gate.
One more quick thought: In some foreign jurisdictions it takes much longer to move through the Degrees than it does in the typical US Lodge. Requiring at least a year between the Degrees is not uncommon. I've often thought that the slower process would be better for our Lodges, and for the candidate himself.