What does "Merit" mean?

"All preferment among Masons is grounded upon real worth and personal merit only; that so the lords may be well served, the brethren not put to shame, nor the loyal Craft despised; therefore no Master or Warden is chosen by seniority, but for his merit."

Thus commences Part IV of the Ancient Charges of Freemasonry in the preamble to the Book of Constitution of the Grand Lodge of New Zealand. It is a direct copy, in more modern language, of that included in Anderson's Constitutions published in 1723 which is considered to be the guiding document of modern Freemasonry. It is this statement which means that taking the Third Degree and gaining the title "Master Mason" does not entitle any of us to sit in the chair of Master of a Lodge. It tells us, in no uncertain terms, that we have to earn the right to rule over a Lodge.

What then does "merit" mean, or imply? Or, if you like, what characteristics do we need in the person we choose to preside over us pro tem?

Part of the answer lies in the formal list (the "Ancient Charges") presented to the Master-elect prior to his Obligation. Among other things he agrees to:

• be a good Man and true, and strictly to obey the Moral Law
• be a peaceable subject, and cheerfully to conform to the Laws of the Country
• work diligently, live creditably, and act honorably by all men
• avoid private piques and quarrels, and to guard against intemperance and excess
• be cautious in your carriage and behaviour, courteous to your brethren, and faithful to your Lodge.
• respect genuine and true brethren
• promote the general good of society, to cultivate the Social Virtues, and to propagate the knowledge of the Mystic Art as far as your influence and ability can extend

At the very least, these points should be readily apparent in a prospective Master. If any one of them cannot be satisfied we should be looking at his candidature with critical circumspection.

Not every one can be a great ritualist. Not every one can be a great administrator. Not every one can be a great debator, or educator. But every one can try to achieve those attributes. And every one CAN work at the points listed above. Because, if the occupier of the Chair of a Lodge fails in respect of any of those points he will almost certainly not be able to uphold the five points listed by RW Bro Greg Goding in his presentation to the Divisional Conference in 2009. That is to say he will not be able to achieve perfect harmony; he will not have a streamlined business programme; ritual will suffer; the festive board will in all probability be embarrassing; and he will open up a path for the cringe factor. Indeed, we should be concerned about his ability to live up to the Five Points of Fellowship.

The points above are, of course, not the only provisions read to the Master-elect, but they form the basis of what we might mean by "merit". To them we need to add skill in leadership and management, i.e. skills in running meetings and supporting the other governance aspects of a Lodge.

How then do we apply these criteria of merit? And what are our obligations with regard to them

As someone advances in his stations in a Lodge he is watched. Not necessarily formally, or even overtly. But he will be aware of scrutiny. Hopefully he will be doing his very best and, equally hopefully, he will not be seeking kudos by doing so. If we are looking to the success of our Lodges we should be watching for these characteristics and abilities and where a Brother is falling short in them we should be offering him every assistance to overcome his deficiencies. We must never lose sight of the fact that all of Masonic philosophy implies improvement in ourselves, and in assisting each other to do so. Such a Brother would benefit from the support that the implementation of governance plans in a Lodge will bring.

As an aside, there is another point in the ancient charges:

•  You promise a regular attendance on the Communications and Committees of the Grand Lodge, upon receiving proper notice

Having just received advice of the costs of the Auckland Communications in November I am forced to ask the question how a Master, who may have only modest means, of a Lodge with modest resources, can afford to attend to satisfy this obligation. Is this a direction in which we should be heading?

Gary Kerkin