MasonicMinute.com
|
|
|---|---|
|
Posted at: 6:25 pm Why do we have investigation committees? The ‘duh’ answer is of course “to ensure that we are bringing good men into the fraternity.” Yeah, okay. Calling a quasi sales pitch laced with an inquiry that would make Homer Simpson look like Isaac Newton an investigation is both sadly humorous and insulting. I remember my investigation, (if you want to call it that) and all I remember doing was talking to the brother about his experiences in WWII. No doubt, I’m a huge history buff and I enjoyed the conversation but I was ready to be grilled like a suspected communist during the Kennedy administration and to have the only means of determining whether or not I was worthy to be made a Freemason go so lightly was a bit disappointing. I later on participated in a few investigations myself (usually as an observer because I was so new I didn’t know how they were supposed to be conducted) and all I saw was the lodge members telling the candidate how cool the lodge was. They would go over the trivial facts about who’s who and what happened where involving the fraternity, but they would barely ask the petitioner anything. Some guys of course asked a few important questions like their family’s opinion, if their spouses supported them, if they came from a Masonic family, etc. This practice I am happy to say has died and has been replaced with a more suitable investigation or as I like to call it; interrogation. Another Brother and myself made a decision that with all the petitioners we get here on out we should go about the investigation in a more strict and probing fashion. We did, and let me tell you I was shocked at the questions that we asked and got honest answers to. If we were a government agency we would have surely been sued nine times over, but the reaction from the petitioners was excellent. One guy even said that the investigation was inspiring because he felt that if he was allowed membership too easily it would not have made a good impression on him. That gentlemen is the point. The fraternity needs to make it a practice to approach the investigation committees as if the petitioner is trying the get into the CIA, not Taco Bell. Remember, THEY are trying to join US, we are not trying to sell US to THEM. To further make my point clear I will include a few questions that were asked during our last investigations: Why do you want to join? Why should we accept you? How does your family feel about this? How much time are you able to give to the fraternity? Where do you work? How long have you worked there? Are you involved in a church, etc? What are your hobbies? What’s the last book you’ve read? What is your educational background? What do you think about symbolism? What does the pentagram mean to you? Are you content with asking for help? Have you ever been in a position to teach others? And there are of course many more, and you may even try screwing with the guy just to see what his reaction would be. Ask him something like “If you had a jar of peanut butter what would you do with it?” The mood doesn’t have to be doom and gloom, but I will end with the most important question that every investigation committee should ask petitioners and every Freemason should ask himself for that matter and that is: ARE YOU MOTIVATED TO FAIL IN YOUR QUEST FOR PERFECTION? If they answer in the affirmative, then consider their petition. If not, (you may have to repeat the question to them a few times, but be patient) then show them the way to the Lions Club. |
|
|
|
3 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Leave a comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Main Menu
Masonry
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
July 19, 2007



I was recently asked to take part in the investigation of a new petitioner. The Brother who normally heads up the investigations is a gentleman who has a rather stern outward persona and when asked of what he did before retirement his answer is very short “I worked for the State Department”. But when you get to know him, you realize he’s a great guy who would give you the shirt off his back - but he still won’t say what he did for the State Department. Back to the investigation I was part of, the petitioner was very nervous and the investigative lead (for lack of a better term) asked me to break the ice. I had a bunch of questions that I thought were great, none being “icebreakers”. The only thing I could think of was “If Pluto and Goofy are both dogs, why does Goofy have his own house,wear clothes and talks and Pluto is stuck being Mickey’s Pet?” The petitioner got this big grin. the lead investigator could barely hold back his laughter and the third part of our investigation teamwas completely puzzled. It broke the ice alright…next time I think I’ll start with “Why would you bother driving a Chevy to a levy and would it matter if it were dry?”
Comment by Al — July 25, 2007 @ 5:10 pm
This post hits the point clearly; most “investigations” are 90-95% sales pitch. No one asks the hard questions, many don’t even contact the petitioner.
When I petitioned to join Arizona Masonry back in the good old days of the early 90’s only one Brother even contacted me, I never even found out who the other two even were. No doubt they either lied to the WM or didn’t report anything at all.
Too bad, they might have kept me out of the fraternity if they had done a better job…
Comment by Michael — August 3, 2007 @ 1:39 am
In my jurisdiction we have a special “investigative committee report” form with a series of required questions on it. They are fairly elaborate. One I see missing from your list (although possibly covered by an “etc..”) was “Do you believe in a Supreme Being?” Which, is one of our required questions here. We get fairly in depth about their idea of moral behavior and their history and activities in that regard as well (if they drink alcohol that isn’t a negative report, but if they get drunk and get into fights, etc., then it probably is a negative report.) Some of the questions are absolutes where there is clearly a right answer, some of them aren’t. And, of course, we also take the opportunity to get to know the petitioner.
Comment by Jeff Day — January 24, 2008 @ 2:24 am