The Ballot...or Peace and Harmony
                         by Denis Scott, MPS
     (Reprinted by permission of The Philalethes - February 1990)

     There  are  many proponents within our fraternity  that  wish  to 
modify  or even remove the ballot from Freemasonry. They say that  the 
method of one black ball gives a coward an opportunity for  destroying 
a man's chance of becoming a Freemason. They say that it is tyrannical 
for  one  man to have such power. Some Master Masons advocate  that  a 
majority  ballot should suffice for initiation and membership,  others 
that  three black balls should control a man's entry into  our  Order. 
Others  more  radical,  suggest removing the  ballot  completely  from 
Freemasonry.  Our  Brothers who are of these opinions may  have  valid 
reasons in their mind to suggest such major changes, but perhaps  they 
have  not  thought  it through enough to see the  drastic  effect  the 
change  would  have  on the most important aspect  in  the  continuing 
success of our great Fraternity, and that is the Peace and Harmony  in 
our Lodges.

     Brother  Allen E. Roberts suggests in the October issue  of  'The 
Philalethes'  in  his column, "Through Masonic Windows," that  if  the 
ballot  is  removed,  the supreme authority of  the  Master  could  be 
utilized  should a member object to a petition. Brother  Roberts  does 
not  state  that a Master must reject the petition in the event  of  a 
private  objection,  he  just  states that a  Master  can  reject  the 
petition.  If one coolly considers the implication of Brother  Roberts 
suggestion, or the other changes recommended regarding the  balloting, 
then one could possibly reach the following conclusions:

     1.  The Master may or may not act on the private objection.  This 
places  the  Master in the position of  consequently  threatening  the 
Peace  and Harmony in his Lodge. If the Master accepts  the  petition, 
thus  denying  the  private objection, he alienates a  member  of  his 
Lodge.  A  member  to whom the Master owes his  first  allegiance  to, 
because  not  only is he a Brother Master Mason, but a member  of  the 
Master's  Lodge. The Master owes no allegiance to the petitioner  when 
weighed against the wishes of a member of his Lodge.

     2.  A  man  wishes to join a Lodge, but  knowing  a  member  will 
object, he waits until a Master is elected that will look favorable on 
his  petition and will overrule the private objection. The  Peace  and 
Harmony of the Lodge is again in jeopardy.

     3.  A  private objection is made to the Master. The  Master  must 
determine if the objection is legitimate or not, if we are to consider 
the concerns Brother Roberts has of indiscriminate voting keeping good 
men  out.  If  the  objection is  legitimate  then  the  Investigating 
Committee  would discover this in the course of its investigation  and 
so  report  it to the Master and to the Lodge.  The  obvious  question 
would  be what constitutes a legitimate objection? Do we need  another 
list of rules from Grand Lodge on how to run our Lodges, because  that 
is  what would be needed if we allow the Master to be the final  judge 
of a man's worthiness to become a Master Mason. Would the list contain 
reference  to  a  man's  color,  as  we  all  know  that  is  a  major 
consideration in some "Mason's" eyes.

     4. A member has a personal animosity towards a petitioner. De  we 
as  Master  Masons  wish  to  place a  Brother  Master  Mason  in  the 
embarrassing position of explaining to the Master why he does not wish 
to  sit in Lodge with the petitioner?  This is the crux of  the  whole 
issue,  that  the member does not wish to sit in his  Lodge  with  the 
petitioner. Have we forgot the right of privacy? Do we need to  invade 
another  Master Mason's private thoughts and ideals (however  mistaken 
they may be in our opinion), in order to obtain another candidate.

     When we place the Master in the position of ruling on a  members' 
private  objection, we are asking him in actuality, to act as  another 
man's  conscience.  The Master will have enough  difficulty  wrestling 
with  his own conscience during his year of office. without the  added 
burden he will absorb if the ballot is removed.

     Do we as Master Masons have the right to place the responsibility 
for the final decision on a petition, on the shoulders of the  Master? 
Surely he has enough responsibilities to fulfill in the present scheme 
of  things without giving him this dangerous and volatile decision  to 
deliberate  on.  We  need to ask the question of  how  adequately  the 
duties  of Master are carried out before we add this most critical  of 
decisions  to  the  Charge a Master receives at  his  installation.  A 
decision  that will affect the future of a Lodge and  ultimately,  our 
Fraternity.

     If  we give the ultimate decision to one man, the  Master,  isn't 
that  the  same as we have now? Are we saying that every  Master  will 
rule correctly without disturbing the Peace and Harmony of his  Lodge? 
Is a man infallible because he becomes Master of his Lodge?

     Should we as Freemasons organize our beloved Fraternity along the 
lines  of a social organization? An organization which  Brother  Allen 
states,  "I assume it has a method whereby undesirables will  continue 
to be rejected." Surely Brother Allen knows what they say about people 
who assume.

     Appendant bodies of Freemasonry whose membership consists only of 
Master  Masons, (are there any other kind of Masons?) do not  use  the 
ballot  if  a  private objection is made to the  ruling  head  of  the 
organization. It is kept within the organization and no  embarrassment 
is  caused, because a Master Mason is involved. The rule of Peace  and 
Harmony  prevails,  at least in some appendant bodies. In  others  the 
ballot box rules supreme.

     There  are  many  valid reasons for removing the  ballot  from  a 
Masonic  related  organization  because the  petitioners  are  already 
Master Masons, tried and found worthy, but the same does not apply  to 
petitioners  to  the Blue Lodge. It is important to  always  remember, 
that any Master Mason applying to an appendant body, knowing that  the 
ballot box governs his acceptance, has no valid reason for  advocating 
the  usurping  of  the ballot if it rules against  him.  He  uses  the 
identical form of voting in his Lodge and is fully conversant with the 
rules of the "game." One doesn't normally change the rules because one 
loses the "game."

     We  need only look at the strife in one appendant body  regarding 
the  ballot box to realize that in the heat of disagreement, the  real 
issue of controversy is hidden and the ballot is being blamed for  the 
great  injustice  that  is being suffered by Master  Masons.  When  on 
considers  the arrogant supposition of some Master Masons  that  their 
membership  in  an appendant body is superior to their  membership  in 
their  Mother  Lodge,  then  it  isn't  only  bigotry  that  threatens 
Freemasonry  today. You cannot remove bigotry by removing  the  ballot 
box.

     The  case  for three black balls only creates more of  a  dilemma 
because when three members cast a negative vote, the cry will be  that 
there  are three tyrants keeping a good man out. The  "changers"  will 
then  want  four, five etc., etc., etc., ad-infinitum. Where  will  it 
end?

     Brother  Allen asks the question, "Isn't it  worth  considering?" 
The answer is, "Yes, of course it is," as should every honest  attempt 
to  improve Freemasonry, but sometimes the suggestion does nothing  to 
improve  the situation. The above scenarios may or not become  factual 
if  the ballot is removed, but is it worth the risk? If we remove  the 
ballot  from  Freemasonry,  we shall put at risk  the  most  important 
control  we have for maintaining the principle of Brotherhood  in  our 
Lodges  and  that is, Peace and Harmony. Some worthy  men  are  denied 
entry because of the inadequacy of some Master Masons, and it will  be 
the  same  irrespective  of  the system  of  accepting  men  into  our 
Fraternity.  So be it. The conscious decision of all Master Masons  to 
maintain Peace and Harmony in the Lodge is the single greatest  factor 
in controlling dissent and controversy IN THE LODGE. We do not need to 
endanger it.

     The  premise that God created all men equal becomes a reality  in 
Freemasonry. Many Master Masons practice the concept and many do  not, 
but  this does not mean that we should change Freemasonry  because  of 
the many who fail to follow the precepts and principles of our  Order. 
Indeed,  it is ironic that even God finally realized that  one  cannot 
legislate  morality  when His chosen people failed to follow  the  Ten 
Commandments,  the  first moral constitution. Some believe He  had  to 
come  down amongest us to show us the way, through LOVE, not  laws  or 
rules.

     When  we  consider that the aim of Freemasonry is  to  raise  the 
stature  of a man's inner being to that which will be pleasing to  the 
Supreme  Grand  Master,  and concentrate on doing  just  that  without 
changing  the  rules  and ancient format of the Order,  then  we  will 
remove the bigotry, recrimination, rancour, selfserving pomposity  and 
bitterness that is crippling this greatest of fraternal organizations. 
This Fraternity of ours is a gift from God and as such we should treat 
it more reverently than we do today.