Article VI, as amended would have to be further amended to include the above stipulation. We doubt IRS would approve such an amendment.

4. All grants be published in the Proceedings of Grand Lodge. When the Chairman of the Board of Trustees makes his report, a consolidated list of the grants is given and does appear in the Proceedings of Grand Lodge. If anyone is interested in each individual grant, it is available from the Grand Secretary's Office.

5. A comparative financial statement for the current and past two years be provided for all members of the Grand Lodge. A financial statement is prepared and submitted for publication in the Proceedings of the Grand Lodge by the Foundation. If a member is interested in the progress of the Foundation, he can refer to the Proceedings of Grand Lodge from the preceding years. Otherwise the Foundation would have to have the accountants auditing the Foundation books to prepare such a comparative statement. We are not certain whether the expense involved would be worth it or not.

The resolution is not in proper form to be received.

Respectfully submitted

JACK H. THOMAS, P.G.M.

FRANCIS W. DOUGLAS, P.G.M.

HUGH E. RILEY, P.G.M.

PATRICK H. FENTON, P.G.M.

LEROY S. AXLAND, P.G.M.

RESOLUTION DEFEATED

Salt Lake City, January 31, 1984

Resolution No. 4

It is proposed that:

Section 3-7-2 of Chapter VII of the Code of the Grand Lodge of Utah be amended to delete the Resolution and the decision which follows that Section.

A written ballot is requested.

Respectfully submitted

H. SCOTT HAMMILL

Past Grand Master

REPORT OF THE JURISPRUDENCE COMMITTEE

Resolution No. 4

Your Committee on Jurisprudence, to whom was referred Resolution No. 4, relative to the amendment of Section 3-7-2 of the Grand Lodge Code by deletion of the Standing Resolution and decision contained therein, beg leave to report as follows: This Amendment is in proper form to come before this Grand Lodge. This same resolution came before this Grand Lodge last year and was defeated. P.G.M. Cushing prepared some remarks relative to this resolution and inasmuch as they are as appropriate today as they were in 1983, I will quote them.

"Certainly there is great merit in the proposal, since the Resolution and Decision are contrary to fundamental Masonic law. For 53 years the Grand Lodge operated without such a restriction. In the 1923-24 era, a Lodge initiated, passed, and raised a man who was later determined to be a member of the LDS Church. Subsequently, Masonic charges were filed, trial was duly held, the man was found guilty, and was expelled. At the 1925 Grand Lodge Communication, the Jurisprudence Committee properly ruled that the Lodge had acted improperly, since the man had committed no Masonic offense. Apparently, a heated discussion followed, after which the Standing Resolution was proposed. On proper motion, made and seconded, the Standing Resolution was passed, and has remained a part of the Code since that time. Attempts were made in 1927 and in 1965 to remove the Resolution and Decision, but were defeated.

Certainly, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has little or no concern for or fear of the Masonic Fraternity. They do, however, strongly urge their members not to join organizations such as ours, insisting that any time and energy available beyond their daily vocation and their hours of rest, be spent in furthering the interests of their Church.

Anyone reading LDS literature quickly discovers that some of their dogma is contrary to the tenets of Freemasonry. It is true that in other jurisdictions there are numbers of Mormons who are Masons. Some of them have distinguished Masonic careers. Yet, were these persons living in Utah, there would be much pressure by their fellow LDS members to forsake Masonic connections.

Your Committee on Jurisprudence suggests that you consider very carefully before you cast your ballot on this highly emotional subject. Would abolishing the Standing Resolution have any impact on membership, for good or for ill? Could members of the LDS Church become active and valuable members, thereby strengthening the Craft, and at the same time remain loyal to their faith? Would such Church members fully respect our Ancient Landmark which prohibits any discussion of religion in a Masonic Lodge? Would such members apply individual pressure on our devotees to join their Church? Is the aim of abolishing the Resolution and Decision solely for the purpose of enlarging our membership? Is there any point in our taking a unilateral action, without any change in the position presently held by the leadership of the LDS Church? Are you willing to continue to defend this deviation from Masonic law by retaining this restriction?

The answers to these and other questions you may have in your minds are in your hands.

Respectfully submitted

JACK H. THOMAS, P.G.M.

FRANCIS W. DOUGLAS, P.G.M.

HUGH E. RILEY, P.G.M.

PATRICK H. FENTON, P.G.M.

LEROY S. AXLAND, P.G.M.

RESOLUTION ACCEPTED

Salt Lake City, January 31, 1984