I think we can all agree that the West Gate must be guarded, yet far too often, this duty to the Fraternity does not get performed.
I imagine that we have all seen it, Masons signing petitions for men they have just met, or don’t know at all. Investigation Committees that don’t investigate at all, that just meet a petitioner in the Lodge dining room or a restaurant, ask him a half dozen basic questions and call it good.
Sometimes this backfires badly. Sometimes a man gets through this non-process when the most cursory of check would have shown anyone who bothered to look that he has an extremely problematic past, or even present.
I wonder what we should do in cases like that?
If a man, shortly after he receives the Degrees, or even while in the process of receiving the Degrees is found to have a very negative and public past; and it is discovered that the men who signed his petition did so without knowing him, should action be taken against those men who signed the petition?
Under the same circumstances, if it is found out that the Investigation Committee didn’t do any investigation at all, should action be taken against those men who decided to ignore their duty to investigate?
If so, what form of action should be taken?
Should a Lodge refuse to accept a petition signed by a man proven to sign petitions without knowing the petitioners?
Should Lodge members refuse to use the white ball unless they are satisfied that a petition was signed properly, and that a true investigation was performed?
How do we ensure that Guarding the West Gate actually happens?
Let’s chat about it…
Yesterday there was no new discussion topic because your humble editor (yep, that’s me) managed to fall asleep. Saturday found me outside at Granite Falls, most of the day for an outdoor Master Mason Degree. The Degree was great, but the hard driving rain landing on our heads was not.
Sunday found me at the Grand Lodge office for part of the day, and at the March of Unity for the rest of the day.
Monday found me back up at the Grand Lodge office for a full day of work.
Apparently it was too much, because when I got home Monday evening I promptly fell asleep on the sofa and by the time I woke up, the deadline for Emeth had passed.
Alas, today was back to normal, so Emeth is back on schedule.
I believe the tone for each new petition should be set by the sitting Master. That the investigating committee should be charged with completing a thorough investigation. Most Brothers though have no idea what that looks like. (Perhaps a class at the LLR). I would venture to say that neither the Brothers that sign a petition, nor the references put down by the candidate are rarely contacted. The candidates social media is another simple check. If the Brothers of the investigating committee aren’t doing these simple things then certainly some type of action needs to be taken. They must be reminded of the importance of their duties to guard the west gate. What further discipline or punishment should be meted out? Removal from further investigations? Removal from an appointed office? I would offer that most of us have committed one or more of the offenses described by MW Cameron. I have been on investigating committees where I knew the right thing to do was to return a negative report and not cast a white ball. I was new in my Masonic walk and didn’t possess the fortitude then to do the right thing and so I “went along to get along”, and for that I am sorry.
These are just my opinions. I don't think punitive actions against brethren who participate in the admission process, regarless of role, of a man who should not have been admitted is a good idea. We would end up spending more time investigating the committee or signers than we did the candidate. There are two things I think we could do, however that might affect the process. One, add a electronic background check. We could tell a candidate that we will be looking at social media and publically available criminal records, and then do that. The results of that investigation should be included in the report to the Lodge. The next thing we should do, and thjs would be a culture change, is have a Lodge post mortem when a brother is expelled after a Masonic trial. If the Grand Lodge officers or DDGM could come to a Lodge and discuss the facts of the trial, possibly uncomfortible, and then ask the question, "did we miss something?" Create a learning culture, and connect behavior to consequences. Maybe even ask thhe signers and the committee if there was any indications of a problem. Its very easy to say "yes" when there are no consequences, and the best consequences I think are to have to experience the failure. People learn very quickly that way.
I often wonder at my own suitability. Was I investigated enough? Only one emember of the lodge was involved in my investigation, and he had known me since I was in diapers. He and my dad were both officers in the local volunteer fire station which I joined myself at 16. In college and the army I had no contact with him. But on my return to civilian life, I met him again through the national rifle association. He taught my range safety officer class for example. It was at this time that I noticed his masonic jewelry. It was 8 more years of sporadic interaction with him at various nra related functions such as both of us volunteering at a fair booth before I petitioned. Other than him, the only other contact with a member before my initiation was about 30 minutes of chatting with the Tyler and a past master in the waiting room while a lodge was in session. Was this a sufficient investigation? I don't know. Do I feel adequate to perform an investigation myself? Not really, not without a detailed guide of what I should do.
Punishing investigating committees for failures means no one will be on those committees. We’re a volunteer organization, not Walmart. One of the few times I’ll say this, but perhaps grand lodge should fund background check accounts to be provided to secretaries of lodges where a simple click they can find out any past history on the potential candidate. Having access to something like that would go a long way towards resolving some issues we’ve faced in the past. This might require more information to be provided by the candidate, ssn, drivers license number, etc.
I believe Guarding Our West Gate starts with the Brother in the Mirror. Where are our Mental, Spiritual, Emotional and Physical states of being in all of us? I have pondered this many years and believe there needs to be a type of periodic optional bench marks per se, to give this a baseline of origin and a foundation for said matrix. Where by, we are all keep accountable in all our endeavors. This tentative standard needs to be developed and reinforced by periodic clinics, (Professional Education, as it were) Makes no sense to blame our Brothers for the lack of high performance that our Leadership in the past decades have not developed yet. How could they?, this is a continuing evolving need of operational procedures. Please, I share this in a kind and gentle way for the betterment of our Craft. Better educated Brothers in this specific area will yield better performance.
I myself have seen petitions being handed out very willy-nilly to men that have only been to the lodge to maybe three times. I believe that some lodges are just trying to get their numbers up and I have actually talked with one or two brothers and told them isn't it quality over quantity? Well their response was yes true however right now we need members. And I find that extremely disgusting and disrespectful to the craft I am a newly passed FC and even I can tell that I personally spent 4 months before I even saw a petition went through all the six steps went to every meeting I could and learned as much as I possibly could and got to know as many brethren in The lodges I could. I don't think that it's necessarily an investigative committee problem I think it is a problem with people being too willy-nilly with petitions as well as brothers voting in the affirmative even when they know absolutely nothing about the candidate the investigative committee will say all is good but how am I supposed to vote for somebody (even though I can't yet) for somebody that I don't know at all. I was told when I first started coming to the lodge to get to know everybody that way they can make an informed vote Yes that will take time, but isn't this a marathon not a Sprint? And wouldn't it be worth the extra time to make sure that we don't waste time giving degrees for no reason?
We appoint untrained Brothers to the committee and then most times do not give them sufficient time or tools to do their work and in the end we are left wondering “what happened to the new guy”. The six step program tied to the candidate education program and good mentorship for several years is what is required. But that requires “work” and we have become lazy and want a quick fix.
I believe the tone for each new petition should be set by the sitting Master. That the investigating committee should be charged with completing a thorough investigation. Most Brothers though have no idea what that looks like. (Perhaps a class at the LLR). I would venture to say that neither the Brothers that sign a petition, nor the references put down by the candidate are rarely contacted. The candidates social media is another simple check. If the Brothers of the investigating committee aren’t doing these simple things then certainly some type of action needs to be taken. They must be reminded of the importance of their duties to guard the west gate. What further discipline or punishment should be meted out? Removal from further investigations? Removal from an appointed office? I would offer that most of us have committed one or more of the offenses described by MW Cameron. I have been on investigating committees where I knew the right thing to do was to return a negative report and not cast a white ball. I was new in my Masonic walk and didn’t possess the fortitude then to do the right thing and so I “went along to get along”, and for that I am sorry.
These are just my opinions. I don't think punitive actions against brethren who participate in the admission process, regarless of role, of a man who should not have been admitted is a good idea. We would end up spending more time investigating the committee or signers than we did the candidate. There are two things I think we could do, however that might affect the process. One, add a electronic background check. We could tell a candidate that we will be looking at social media and publically available criminal records, and then do that. The results of that investigation should be included in the report to the Lodge. The next thing we should do, and thjs would be a culture change, is have a Lodge post mortem when a brother is expelled after a Masonic trial. If the Grand Lodge officers or DDGM could come to a Lodge and discuss the facts of the trial, possibly uncomfortible, and then ask the question, "did we miss something?" Create a learning culture, and connect behavior to consequences. Maybe even ask thhe signers and the committee if there was any indications of a problem. Its very easy to say "yes" when there are no consequences, and the best consequences I think are to have to experience the failure. People learn very quickly that way.
I often wonder at my own suitability. Was I investigated enough? Only one emember of the lodge was involved in my investigation, and he had known me since I was in diapers. He and my dad were both officers in the local volunteer fire station which I joined myself at 16. In college and the army I had no contact with him. But on my return to civilian life, I met him again through the national rifle association. He taught my range safety officer class for example. It was at this time that I noticed his masonic jewelry. It was 8 more years of sporadic interaction with him at various nra related functions such as both of us volunteering at a fair booth before I petitioned. Other than him, the only other contact with a member before my initiation was about 30 minutes of chatting with the Tyler and a past master in the waiting room while a lodge was in session. Was this a sufficient investigation? I don't know. Do I feel adequate to perform an investigation myself? Not really, not without a detailed guide of what I should do.
Punishing investigating committees for failures means no one will be on those committees. We’re a volunteer organization, not Walmart. One of the few times I’ll say this, but perhaps grand lodge should fund background check accounts to be provided to secretaries of lodges where a simple click they can find out any past history on the potential candidate. Having access to something like that would go a long way towards resolving some issues we’ve faced in the past. This might require more information to be provided by the candidate, ssn, drivers license number, etc.
I believe Guarding Our West Gate starts with the Brother in the Mirror. Where are our Mental, Spiritual, Emotional and Physical states of being in all of us? I have pondered this many years and believe there needs to be a type of periodic optional bench marks per se, to give this a baseline of origin and a foundation for said matrix. Where by, we are all keep accountable in all our endeavors. This tentative standard needs to be developed and reinforced by periodic clinics, (Professional Education, as it were) Makes no sense to blame our Brothers for the lack of high performance that our Leadership in the past decades have not developed yet. How could they?, this is a continuing evolving need of operational procedures. Please, I share this in a kind and gentle way for the betterment of our Craft. Better educated Brothers in this specific area will yield better performance.
I myself have seen petitions being handed out very willy-nilly to men that have only been to the lodge to maybe three times. I believe that some lodges are just trying to get their numbers up and I have actually talked with one or two brothers and told them isn't it quality over quantity? Well their response was yes true however right now we need members. And I find that extremely disgusting and disrespectful to the craft I am a newly passed FC and even I can tell that I personally spent 4 months before I even saw a petition went through all the six steps went to every meeting I could and learned as much as I possibly could and got to know as many brethren in The lodges I could. I don't think that it's necessarily an investigative committee problem I think it is a problem with people being too willy-nilly with petitions as well as brothers voting in the affirmative even when they know absolutely nothing about the candidate the investigative committee will say all is good but how am I supposed to vote for somebody (even though I can't yet) for somebody that I don't know at all. I was told when I first started coming to the lodge to get to know everybody that way they can make an informed vote Yes that will take time, but isn't this a marathon not a Sprint? And wouldn't it be worth the extra time to make sure that we don't waste time giving degrees for no reason?
We appoint untrained Brothers to the committee and then most times do not give them sufficient time or tools to do their work and in the end we are left wondering “what happened to the new guy”. The six step program tied to the candidate education program and good mentorship for several years is what is required. But that requires “work” and we have become lazy and want a quick fix.
Even Grand Masters need sleep occasionally. You are doing a Great job MW Cameron.