209 lines
13 KiB
Plaintext
209 lines
13 KiB
Plaintext
SHORT TALK BULLETIN - Vol.VIII September, 1930 No.9
|
||
|
||
I VOUCH FOR HIM
|
||
|
||
by: Unknown
|
||
|
||
To vouch for a Mason is, Masonically, to say to the brother to whom
|
||
you are introducing the one you are vouching for: “I know that
|
||
Bother J.D. (John Doe) is a Master Mason.”
|
||
By implication it means (1) that the brother doing the vouching has
|
||
sat in open lodge with the brother being vouched for: or (2) that the
|
||
brother vouching has subjected the brother vouched for to a strict
|
||
trial and due examination: or (3) that the brother vouching has
|
||
received an avouchment of another brother he knows to be a Master
|
||
Mason, that the brother now vouched for is known to “Him” as a Master
|
||
Mason.
|
||
In some jurisdictions Grand Lodges have decided that no brother may
|
||
undertake a private examination of any man representing himself as a
|
||
brother without orders from the Worship Master of his lodge, or the
|
||
Grand Master. In these Jurisdictions it is held that the Worshipful
|
||
Master is solely responsible for the proper purging of his lodge, and
|
||
that, in consequence, he and only he has the right to select the
|
||
committee which shall examine a stranger. In such Jurisdictions only
|
||
the Master (or the Grand Master) may decide who is competent and who
|
||
is not competent to examine a visitor for entrance into his lodge.
|
||
Some Jurisdictions have ruled that no “second-hand” avouchment is
|
||
permissible - that “A) can vouch for “B” only if he has sat in open
|
||
lodge with him, with the exception, of course, that the members of a
|
||
properly qualified and appointed committee may vouch for the brother
|
||
they have examined if he has proved himself to be a Master Mason.
|
||
Avouchment is a very important matter; much more important than
|
||
appears upon the surface. It demands, and should receive, the
|
||
earnest thought of all officers of the lodge. The “good and
|
||
wholesome instruction” which a Master is charged to give, or cause to
|
||
be given to his brethren may be well concerned, occasionally, with
|
||
this vital matter.
|
||
The number of men who have never taken the degrees who try to get
|
||
into Masonic lodges is very small. Nevertheless, there have been,
|
||
are, and doubtless will be such men; men without principle or honor;
|
||
“eavesdroppers” who have heard what was not intended for their ears,
|
||
or men who have become “book Masons” by the study of some of the
|
||
exposes of Masonry which may still be found in some libraries, and
|
||
which they deem to set forth the correct ritual.
|
||
However few in number these importers may be, they must be strictly
|
||
guarded against. No such crook desires to work his way into a
|
||
Masonic lodge for any other purpose than to obtain credit for being a
|
||
Master Mason, and, later, to defraud some of the brethren with whom
|
||
he thus hopes to sit in lodge.
|
||
Far more dangerous than the “eavesdropper” is the “cowan.” In these
|
||
modern days the “cowan” is the man who has been legally raised but
|
||
who has been dropped N.P.D., or suspended or expelled after a Masonic
|
||
trial; or he is an Entered Apprentice, or Fellowcraft, whose further
|
||
advancement has been stopped for cause.
|
||
If such be evilly disposed he may - and has been known to - forge a
|
||
good standing card to use as credentials. Or he may find a lost card
|
||
and assume the identity of the name upon it. Some brethren are so
|
||
unwise as to keep their good standing cards from year to year as an
|
||
interesting collection. If such a collection be stolen, it may be
|
||
the innocent means of letting loose upon the Fraternity a whole flock
|
||
of designing cowans, since dates upon such cards are changed with
|
||
little difficulty. It is an excellent Masonic rule to destroy last
|
||
year’s card as soon as you new one arrives. Loss of a current card
|
||
should be immediately reported to the Grand Secretary, as well as to
|
||
the Master of the Lodge. The Grand Secretary will probably notify
|
||
all constituent lodges to be on the lookout for any person presenting
|
||
that lost card.
|
||
In many Jurisdictions Masters may not authorize the examination of
|
||
any would-be visitor who cannot produce credentials. In other
|
||
Jurisdictions it is considered sufficient if some known brother
|
||
vouches for the credibility of the would-be visitor even if he has no
|
||
credentials. Some Jurisdiction require Masters to assure themselves
|
||
that the lodge from which the visitor purports to come is a “just and
|
||
legally constituted lodge” under some recognized Grand Lodge.
|
||
Particularly, Jurisdictions which are afflicted with clandestine
|
||
Masons are apt to be strict in this regard. All Jurisdictions should
|
||
be especially strict with putative brethren who hail from
|
||
Jurisdictions where clandestine Masonry is know to flourish.
|
||
Unless forbidden by Grand Lodge, “A” may accept the avouchment of “B”
|
||
that he has sat in lodge with “C”, and therefore knows “C” to be a
|
||
Master Mason. But “A” is not obliged to accept this avouchment. “A”
|
||
may have no Masonic confidence in “B”. He may believe that “B” has
|
||
not been to lodge for a decade and distrusts his memory as to his
|
||
sitting in lodge with “C”. No Masonic authority has the power to
|
||
compel “A” to vouch for a brother because he has been vouched for to
|
||
him by another. To vouch or not to vouch is matter of conscience and
|
||
belief. Neither is under control of any law, secular or Masonic.
|
||
Under no circumstances whatever should “A” ever accept an avouchment
|
||
from “B” as to “C,” unless all three be present together.
|
||
“B” will call up “A” on the telephone: “I’m sending Brother “C”
|
||
around to see you,” he may say. “I vouch for him as a Master Mason.
|
||
Will you see that he is properly introduced to our Tiler tonight?”
|
||
(A’s) proper answer is: “Not unless you bring him around and
|
||
introduce him to me personally.”
|
||
“A” has no Masonic means of knowing that the man who comes in and
|
||
says: “I’m Brother “B,” is really the “B” for whom “C” has vouched!
|
||
For the same reasons, no avouchment by letter should ever be
|
||
accepted, no matter what the circumstances - nay, not even if the
|
||
letter contains a picture of the man it vouches for! Letters can be
|
||
lost. Photographs may be changed. Even Lodge Seals may be imitated.
|
||
Masonically, there is no such thing as vouching in absence. Masonic
|
||
avouchment can only be accomplished in the presence of all three; the
|
||
brother vouched for, the bother vouched to, and the brother doing the
|
||
vouching. Any other is spurious, un-Masonic and should never be
|
||
tolerated or accepted.
|
||
“B” does not receive “lawful Masonic information when “A” says to
|
||
him: “I have been to the Chapter with “C.”
|
||
It is true that no man may become a Royal Arch Mason unless he is
|
||
first a Master Mason. A Royal Arch Mason, therefore, may have at
|
||
some time been a Master Mason. But “A” cannot know how well the
|
||
Chapter in question guards its tiled door. For all he knows to the
|
||
contrary, “C” held a forged Chapter card, had been expelled from his
|
||
Blue Lodge and yet managed to get, or retain his Chapter card.
|
||
Doubtful? Probably! But possible never the
|
||
What applies to the Chapter, of course, also applies to the
|
||
Commandry, Council, Scottish Rite, Shrine, Grotto and Eastern Star -
|
||
any body of Masonry the members of which must first be Master
|
||
Masons.
|
||
Especially does it refer to the Masonic Club! The Masonic Club,
|
||
worthy and valuable organization though it might be, is in no sense a
|
||
Masonic organization. It is an organization of Masons. In some
|
||
cities are Interchurch Men’s Clubs, in which male members of all
|
||
churches are welcome as members. But no one, the Men’s Club least of
|
||
all, would claim that such clubs are Churches! A Masonic club is
|
||
made up of Master Masons, presumably in good standing, but it is not
|
||
Masonically Tiled, it is not under direct control of a Grand Lodge,
|
||
it is not Masonic, and it is not competent to judge for any Blue
|
||
Lodge the genuineness of Masonic Membership. Therefore, the fact
|
||
that “A” meets “B” in his Masonic club is not “lawful Masonic
|
||
information” which “A” can pass on to his Tiler, saying: “I know “B”
|
||
to be a Master Mason.”
|
||
None of these cautions or restrictions can legitimately be considered
|
||
to reflect upon the honesty of either the brother who desires to
|
||
vouch, or the honor of the brother who wishes to be vouched for. Let
|
||
us draw a parallel case and consider what “Avouchment” is in the
|
||
business world.
|
||
“A” desires to borrow money from his bank. The bank knows and trust
|
||
“A”. But long experience has taught the bank that “one name paper”
|
||
is at times not good paper. The bank, therefore, requires “A” to
|
||
secure some additional name as an endorsement. “A” asks “B” to
|
||
endorse his paper. Now “B” may know “A” as a good neighbor, a fellow
|
||
club member, the owner of an adjoining pew in the church. “B”
|
||
however, may know absolutely nothing of “A’s” finances or credit
|
||
rating. If “B” refuses to “vouch for” “A” at the bank, it does not
|
||
mean, and is not taken to mean, that he distrusts “A”, - merely that
|
||
he knows nothing about his financial standing. Similarly even if “B”
|
||
knows all about “A” and trusts him up to the hilt, the bank may not
|
||
know “B” and therefore may be unwilling to take his “avouchment” -
|
||
his endorsement of “A’s” note. That does not mean that the bank
|
||
distrusts “B: - merely that the bank has no knowledge of “B”, one way
|
||
or another.
|
||
Let us suppose “A” says to “B:” “I’m going to bring “C” around to
|
||
see you. I’ve been to Shrine with him. I know him well. He says
|
||
he’s a member of Temple Lodge and I believe him. I’ll vouch for him,
|
||
although I haven’t sat in lodge with him.”
|
||
When “B” very properly refuses to take this avouchment, neither “A”
|
||
or “C” have any cause to think that “B” feels any personal distrust
|
||
of either. He simply has not received that “legal Masonic
|
||
Information” which both “A” and “B” know - and “C” should know, if he
|
||
really is a Master Mason - is essential to any proper avouchment.
|
||
From these premises it necessarily follows that any avouchment
|
||
predicated upon an examination other than that in Ancient Craft
|
||
Masonry is of no value as “lawful Masonic information.” “A” comes to
|
||
the Tiler’s door with “C and asks for a committee to examine him that
|
||
he may visit. “A” has a little talk with the Master. “C” is a Mason
|
||
alright!” he assures the Master. “But he’s rusty. He never comes to
|
||
Blue Lodge; spends all his time in the Chapter. Appoint a couple of
|
||
Chapter Members on the committee, will you, Worshipful? They’ll soon
|
||
be satisfied!”
|
||
The Worshipful Master will do as he pleases, but he is well advised
|
||
if he picks two brethren who are “Not” Chapter Masons. The brother
|
||
who cannot satisfy a Blue Lodge Committee that has been regularly
|
||
Entered, Passed and Raised in a lodge of Master Masons should not be
|
||
permitted to enter the lodge - not if he is letter perfect in the
|
||
Chapter work and can give all the signs, tokens, and words of the
|
||
Scottish Rite - which are numerous.!
|
||
No avouchment may be accepted from an Entered Apprentice or a
|
||
Fellowcraft. A brother of the first or second degree may be
|
||
absolutely sure that all those in the lodge in which he took his
|
||
degrees were Master Masons, he cannot posses “lawful Masonic
|
||
information” about Master Masons. Neither is he competent to vouch
|
||
to a Tiler for any entered Apprentice or Fellowcraft he remembers as
|
||
in lodge with him, as a Mason of the degree in which the lodge was
|
||
then open on. The right to vouch is strictly a Master Mason’s right’
|
||
no brother of the first or second degree possesses it!
|
||
Vouching for a brother is a solemn undertaking. Before the lodge and
|
||
the brethren the voucher puts his Masonic credit against the
|
||
credibility of the brother he vouches for. No squeamishness of
|
||
feeling should ever interfere. A Master Mason should not vouch for
|
||
his blood brother unless he has sat in lodge with him, tested him for
|
||
himself, or unless his brother has been vouched for to him. He may
|
||
be morally sure his brother is a Mason but a lodge does not recognize
|
||
such surety as “lawful Masonic information.”
|
||
No brother should ever feel offended because a brother will not vouch
|
||
for him. “A” may remember having sat in lodge with “B”, yet “B” may
|
||
have forgotten that they sat together in lodge. If “B” refuses to
|
||
vouch for “A”, “A” should be happy that “B” is so careful a Mason,
|
||
not offended that “B” does not remember or because “he doesn’t trust
|
||
me.”
|
||
|
||
The lodge is more important than the brother. The sanctity of the
|
||
Tiled door is greater than the feelings of the individual. The
|
||
Masonic honor of the brother doing the vouching should be of far
|
||
greater worth to him than any consideration of expediency.
|
||
The entire law and the prophets may be covered in one small
|
||
commandment: “Never vouch unless you have lawful Masonic
|
||
information.”
|
||
|
||
|