|
Post by leonardo on Nov 30, 2007 14:37:20 GMT
I came across this blog in my travels recently and share it here for debate. It deals with what happened one night when a new candidate was black cubed/balled. Well worth a read. Also worth reading are the responses. I'd like to hear your thoughts, please. Here's the link: The Three Black Cubes...
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Nov 30, 2007 15:25:08 GMT
Bro Leo, I have been at a Lodge Meeting only once (in my UGLE days), when a Candidate was Blackballed , in the UK Balls of both colours rather than Cubes are used.
"The secret ballot is the strongest asset to masonry we have. Like our American Democracy, it is our divine right as men of free will, to vote when a vote is called for. And that vote is our individual say in the future of our fraternity. Remember, it not numbers, its quality. If we fail to vote our conscious, then who are we failing?"
I certainly agree with that! (although there is also Democracy in countries other than the USA for example the UK and The Republic of Ireland). One thing also that is Sacrosanct is the Secrecy of the Ballot. So in my honest opinion the Master was wrong to do the following:-
The W.M. called a time out, cleared the lodge and invited, whoever the disgruntled balloter was, to come to him to discuss the problem.
Such an action, whilst no doubt done for the best of reasons was out of order and he should have had more respect for the Secrecy of the Ballot, else why bother? They could have had a simple show of hands instead if Secrecy was not required and indeed mandatory in most Constitutions in such cases.
I would add one very important point. In most Lodges here in the UK, it takes 3 Black Balls to exclude a Candidate and rightly so! No one member has the power to block anyone, nor should they. That is too much power to place in the hands of one Brother. A few UGLE Lodges have 2 Black Balls to exclude but the majority have 3, which is feel is sound.
Blackballing is not something done lightly, as I say in 19 years of Freemasonry I have only seen it happen once. Some may ask, why not simply contact the Lodge Secretary, or Master, or the Proposer and inform them that you have good reason to object to that Candidate? That may not be possible if the information is privileged in some way, perhaps know in a professional basis to a Doctor or Lawyer, Policeman etc who would jeopardise their employment by openly disclosing such matters.
I hope that if the rejected Candidate was otherwise of good character and a fit and proper person that they found another Lodge or even another Affiliation and joined that. In the Mark Degree our attention is drawn to the lesson of the Stone the Builders rejected.
I have not as yet Blackballed any Candidate for any Lodge or Order I have been in and would only do so in very extreme circumstances. Indeed I can only think of think of a handful of people I would do this to were they to be Candidates for any Lodge etc to which I belong and two of those are already Masons anyway!
|
|
|
Post by therondunn on Nov 30, 2007 15:40:27 GMT
Very interesting...
I am ashamed of the poster who did not sign his name to his unbrotherly attacks and mischaracterizations of the brother(s) who cast a cube. It IS, as Widow's Son noted, an election, a real ballot, not a ritual. If you have a good reason to vote no, and do not want to speak to the master about it first, that IS your right... and the exercise of that right is your duty as a mason.
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Nov 30, 2007 15:41:05 GMT
Great post, Bro. Steve. I agree with your sentiments: one member should not be granted such powers and this case, as represented in the blog linked to above, demonstrates why. Be interesting to hear other views on this. Our Mother Lodge will be balloting on a new candidate tomorrow (Saturday 1st. December) but we as EAs won't be permitted to cast a vote. Still, it will be interesting to see how it is done, providing, of course, we are allowed to witness it in the first place
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Nov 30, 2007 15:43:37 GMT
Very interesting... I am ashamed of the poster who did not sign his name to his unbrotherly attacks and mischaracterizations of the brother(s) who cast a cube. It IS, as Widow's Son noted, an election, a real ballot, not a ritual. If you have a good reason to vote no, and do not want to speak to the master about it first, that IS your right... and the exercise of that right is your duty as a mason. I agree. It is after all a secret ballot and should be respected as such.
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Nov 30, 2007 15:48:28 GMT
Bro Theron, whatever else we may disagree on, we are as one on this matter. A Secret Ballot is just that SECRET and no-one, not even a Grand Master, has the right to ask how anyone voted or why? That is a matter for the Judgement and Conscience of the voter alone.
|
|
|
Post by penfold on Nov 30, 2007 16:04:18 GMT
Our Mother Lodge will be balloting on a new candidate tomorrow (Saturday 1st. December) but we as EAs won't be permitted to cast a vote. You don't get a vote? EA's under UGLE do
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Nov 30, 2007 16:07:00 GMT
Our Mother Lodge will be balloting on a new candidate tomorrow (Saturday 1st. December) but we as EAs won't be permitted to cast a vote. You don't get a vote? EA's under UGLE do At least this is my understanding. I could, of course, be wrong but I am sure I heard this somewhere. Bro. Steve!
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Nov 30, 2007 16:07:06 GMT
In LDH unless by permission of the RWM an EA does not speak in Lodge, only when presenting their Piece of Architecture. As to Voting in a Ballot I'm not too sure. Bro Cora could advise I am sure.
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Nov 30, 2007 16:09:21 GMT
Thank you. I was right, after all. Now there's a first
|
|
|
Post by tws on Nov 30, 2007 16:10:34 GMT
Our Mother Lodge will be balloting on a new candidate tomorrow (Saturday 1st. December) but we as EAs won't be permitted to cast a vote. You don't get a vote? EA's under UGLE do Not under our jurisdiction. Only MMs can attend stated meetings and cast a vote.
|
|
|
Post by devoutfreemason on Nov 30, 2007 16:13:38 GMT
You don't get a vote? EA's under UGLE do Not under our jurisdiction. Only MMs can attend stated meetings and cast a vote. That is under every GL jusridiction in the USA. For all praticality EA'a and FC's in the USA aren't considered real members.
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Nov 30, 2007 16:42:01 GMT
Not under our jurisdiction. Only MMs can attend stated meetings and cast a vote. In LDH (in the UK) we can cast a vote from FC onwards. Now, there's a question (and brings us back on topic ) What degree was the one responsible for submitting the black cube/ball, as explained in the link above? But as it was a secret ballot we will never know.
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Nov 30, 2007 16:47:39 GMT
Bro Leo, reading the Blog I assumed the Black-cuber was a Master Mason or even a Past Master.
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Nov 30, 2007 16:54:00 GMT
Bro Leo, reading the Blog I assumed the Black-cuber was a Master Mason or even a Past Master. Thank you Bro. Steve. I imagine whatever his degree he would not have taken such a decision lightly. Another possibility to consider here is that he was demonstrating his understanding of the ballot procedure by remaining silent, he didn't allow himself to be bullied into coming forward.
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Nov 30, 2007 17:25:19 GMT
Yes, whatever his reasons, and only he and TGAOTU know those, he certainly passed that test.
Bullying has no place in Freemasonry! I'm beginning to sound like Stewart Edwards, but that is still the truth.
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Nov 30, 2007 17:53:23 GMT
Yes, whatever his reasons, and only he and TGAOTU know those, he certainly passed that test. Bullying has no place in Freemasonry! I'm beginning to sound like Stewart Edwards, but that is still the truth. ;D ;D
|
|
vtmason
Member
Running Dog Lackey
Posts: 251
|
Post by vtmason on Nov 30, 2007 22:24:33 GMT
Not under our jurisdiction. Only MMs can attend stated meetings and cast a vote. That is under every GL jusridiction in the USA. For all praticality EA'a and FC's in the USA aren't considered real members. Incorrect Brad. In my jurisdiction the only thing that E.A. and F.C. don't do is to vote. They are encouraged to participate at all stated meetings. Most are opened now on the first degree. That is the case for about half of the US Grand Lodges. I have the list somewhere around here.
|
|
imakegarb
Member
One wee, sleeket, cowran, tim'rous beastie
Posts: 3,573
|
Post by imakegarb on Dec 1, 2007 5:08:47 GMT
In my jurisdiction, EAs and FCs do not vote and EAs as specifically not to speak unless told to do so by the RWM. I ran into this while still an EA. I'd been given permission to visit another lodge but the RWM of my lodge told me, clearly, that I was not to give the greetings of my lodge, nor was I to speak. During lodge, in the lodge I was visiting, other BB had given greetings and I noted a silence. I looked to the RWM and saw she was urging me to stand, presumably to give the greetings of my lodge. K, she's telling me to speak. But my RWM told me not to. And I'm to obey them both? What to do? I took the coward's way out and shook my head. I explained, after lodge, and all was pretty cool after that. But I've not forgotten it Oh, and we don't do cubes. I don't recall how many black it takes to reject (2, I think) but I've never heard my lodge BB talk about a black-balling. I have the impression it's very rare.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Dec 1, 2007 5:27:33 GMT
In my jurisdiction, EAs and FCs do not vote... An advantage with this common system is that it acts as a bulwark against what in politics is known as branch stacking. Hypothetically, if some people were to join just to support a friend who needed their votes and were not really interested in long-term participation, the delay of a number of months before they were eligible might be beneficial. In The Theosophical Society there have been several takeover attempts using such tactics and a minimum term of membership was introduced before a member becomes eligible to vote on some issues or to hold executive offices. Recognising the sorry need for such restrictions makes me look at the affairs, being touched upon elsewhere on the forum, of Halcyon Lodge with some concern.
|
|