MASONIC LAW 2008ephratalodge665.org/Masonic Law/Grand Lodge System.pdf · 2015. 4. 30. · Masonic Villages..... 13 Unincorporated unit of the Grand Lodge ... Older law provides that

October 18, 2008

Elizabethtown, Pennsylvania

1

MASONIC LAW 2008

HANDOUT MATERIALS

2

Table of Contents OVERVIEW OF THE GRAND LODGE SYSTEM ................................................................................................. 8

Grand Lodge .................................................................................................................................................. 8

Technical Title: .......................................................................................................................................... 8

The Grand Lodge is an unincorporated association. ................................................................................ 8

Structure of Grand Lodge: ........................................................................................................................ 9

Members: .............................................................................................................................................. 9

Honorary Membership:......................................................................................................................... 9

Past Grand Masters and Past District Deputy Grand Masters: ............................................................. 9

Representatives to the Grand Lodge: ................................................................................................... 9

Communications: .................................................................................................................................. 9

Grand Officers: ........................................................................................................................................ 10

(a) R.W. Grand Master ................................................................................................................... 10

(b) R.W. Deputy Grand Master ....................................................................................................... 10

(c) R.W. Senior Grand Warden ....................................................................................................... 10

(d) R.W. Junior Grand Warden ....................................................................................................... 10

(e) R.W. Grand Treasurer ............................................................................................................... 10

(f) R.W. Grand Secretary ................................................................................................................ 10

Officers of the Grand Lodge: ................................................................................................................... 10

(a) Grand Officers ........................................................................................................................... 10

(b) Past Grand Masters, Deputy Grand Masters and Grand Wardens who having served for at

least two years .................................................................................................................................... 10

(c) Past Grand Secretaries and Grand Treasures having served for six years ................................ 11

(d) Appointed Officers are not “officers” of Grand Lodge per se, but appointed to fulfill the

specific roles set forth in Article 12 of The Ahiman Rezon ................................................................. 11

Governance: ............................................................................................................................................ 11

(a) Ancient usages, customs and landmarks of the Fraternity ....................................................... 11

(b) Constitution (The Ahiman Rezon) ............................................................................................. 11

(c) Grand Master ............................................................................................................................ 11

Tax Exemption:........................................................................................................................................ 11

3

Federal ................................................................................................................................................ 11

Pennsylvania ....................................................................................................................................... 11

Gifts and Bequests to Grand Lodge: ....................................................................................................... 12

Income tax treatment of charitable gifts ............................................................................................ 12

Gift tax treatment of charitable gifts .................................................................................................. 13

Estate tax treatment of charitable gifts .............................................................................................. 13

Income tax treatment of fraternal gifts .............................................................................................. 13

Gift tax treatment of fraternal gifts .................................................................................................... 13

Estate tax treatment of fraternal gifts ................................................................................................ 13

Masonic Villages.......................................................................................................................................... 13

Unincorporated unit of the Grand Lodge ............................................................................................... 13

Governance: ............................................................................................................................................ 14

Tax Exemption:........................................................................................................................................ 14

Gifts and Bequests: ................................................................................................................................. 14

The Masonic Library and Museum of Pennsylvania: .................................................................................. 14

Pennsylvania Non-Profit Corporation: .................................................................................................... 14

Governance: ............................................................................................................................................ 14

Tax Exemption:........................................................................................................................................ 14


The Masonic Library and Museum of Pennsylvania is exclusively charitable. It is a public charity, and

in this case there are generally no issues for any type of donors. ......................................................... 15

The Masonic Youth Foundation of Pennsylvania ........................................................................................ 15

Pennsylvania Non-Profit Corporation ..................................................................................................... 15

Governance: ............................................................................................................................................ 15

Tax Exemption:........................................................................................................................................ 15


The Masonic Youth Foundation of Pennsylvania is exclusively charitable. It is a public charity, and in

this case there are generally no issues for any type of donors. ............................................................. 15

Masonic Blood and Organ Donor Club of Pennsylvania ............................................................................. 15

Pennsylvania Non-Profit Corporation ..................................................................................................... 15

Governance: ............................................................................................................................................ 15

Tax Exemption:........................................................................................................................................ 15

4


The Masonic Charities Fund ........................................................................................................................ 16

Pennsylvania Trust .................................................................................................................................. 16

Governance: ............................................................................................................................................ 16

Trustees: .............................................................................................................................................. 16

Tax Exemption:........................................................................................................................................ 16


The Masonic Charities Fund is exclusively charitable. It is a public charity, and in this case there are

generally no issues for any type of donors. ............................................................................................ 16

Subordinate Lodges .................................................................................................................................... 16

Governance: ............................................................................................................................................ 16

Tax Exemption:........................................................................................................................................ 17

Fraternal .............................................................................................................................................. 17

Charitable funds .................................................................................................................................. 17

Gifts and bequests: ................................................................................................................................. 17

Fraternal .............................................................................................................................................. 17

Charitable funds .................................................................................................................................. 17

Temple and Hall Associations ..................................................................................................................... 17

Pennsylvania non-profit corporations .................................................................................................... 17

Purpose: .................................................................................................................................................. 17

Governance: ............................................................................................................................................ 17

Tax Exemption:........................................................................................................................................ 18

Scope of Operation: ................................................................................................................................ 18

Distribution of proceeds upon sale: ........................................................................................................ 18

Sources of Masonic Law .............................................................................................................................. 20

MASONIC CHARGES, TRIALS, APPEALS MASONIC DISCIPLINE .................................................................... 21

Masonic Charges ......................................................................................................................................... 21

In writing ................................................................................................................................................. 21

Sufficiently explicit .................................................................................................................................. 21

Experienced member .............................................................................................................................. 21

Secretary ................................................................................................................................................. 21

Accuser .................................................................................................................................................... 21

5

Accused ................................................................................................................................................... 21

Worshipful Master .................................................................................................................................. 22

Civil Proceedings ..................................................................................................................................... 22

Withdrawn .............................................................................................................................................. 22

Lodge Action ............................................................................................................................................... 22

Trials ............................................................................................................................................................ 22

Appeals ........................................................................................................................................................ 24

Other Forms of Masonic Discipline ............................................................................................................. 24

MISCELLANEOUS ......................................................................................................................................... 25

MATERIALS .................................................................................................................................................. 25

MASONIC ORGANIZATION CHART .............................................................................................................. 26

ANTIDISCRIMINATION LAWS AND PENNSYLVANIA FREEMASONRY .......................................................... 27

Background ................................................................................................................................................. 27

Freedom of Association .............................................................................................................................. 27

U.S. Supreme Court ..................................................................................................................................... 28

Roberts v. Unites States Jaycees, 468 U.S. 609 (1984). .......................................................................... 28

Rotary International v. Rotary Club of Duarte, 481 U.S. 537 (1987). ..................................................... 29

The Pennsylvania Human Relations Act ...................................................................................................... 29

Philadelphia Electric Co. v. Human Relations Commission, 5 Pa. Commw. 329 (1972). ........................ 31

Human Relations Commission v. Loyal Order of Moose, Lodge No. 107, 448 Pa. 451 (1972). .............. 31

Loyal Order of Moose, Lodge No. 145 v. Human Relations Commission, 16 Pa. Commw. 433 (1974). . 31

Recent Oregon Decision .............................................................................................................................. 32

Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................... 32

REAL ESTATE TAX EXEMPTIONS .................................................................................................................. 34

Real Estate Tax Exemption. ......................................................................................................................... 34

The legal framework is complex. ............................................................................................................ 34

Act 55 .................................................................................................................................................. 34

Exemption ........................................................................................................................................... 34

Qualifying As An “Institution Of Purely Public Charity” .......................................................................... 34

Charitable Purpose .............................................................................................................................. 35

Free from Private Profit Motive .......................................................................................................... 35

Substantial Portion .............................................................................................................................. 35

6

Subjects of Charity .............................................................................................................................. 35

Relieve Government ........................................................................................................................... 35

The Enumerated Exemptions Of The General County Assessment Law ................................................ 35

Exempt Property ................................................................................................................................. 36

Not Exempt ......................................................................................................................................... 36

Not Exempt 2 ...................................................................................................................................... 36

Taxing Authorities’ Latitude To Conduct Separate Analysis Of Separate Operations ............................ 36

Assessment Law .................................................................................................................................. 36

Act 55 .................................................................................................................................................. 36

Burdens Of Proof..................................................................................................................................... 37

Owners ................................................................................................................................................ 37

Sales and Use Tax ................................................................................................................................ 37

Mackey’s Landmarks ................................................................................................................................... 38

FIRST ............................................................................................................................................................ 39

SECOND ....................................................................................................................................................... 39

THIRD .......................................................................................................................................................... 39

FOURTH ....................................................................................................................................................... 39

FIFTH ........................................................................................................................................................... 40

SIXTH ........................................................................................................................................................... 40

SEVENTH ..................................................................................................................................................... 40

EIGHTH ........................................................................................................................................................ 40

NINTH .......................................................................................................................................................... 41

TENTH .......................................................................................................................................................... 41

ELEVENTH .................................................................................................................................................... 41

TWELFTH ..................................................................................................................................................... 42

THIRTEEN .................................................................................................................................................... 42

FOURTEENTH .............................................................................................................................................. 42

FIFTEENTH ................................................................................................................................................... 42

SIXTEENTH ................................................................................................................................................... 42

SEVENTEENTH ............................................................................................................................................. 43

EIGHTEENTH ................................................................................................................................................ 43

NINETEENTH................................................................................................................................................ 43

7

TWENTIETH ................................................................................................................................................. 43

TWENTY-FIRST ............................................................................................................................................. 43

TWENTY-THIRD ........................................................................................................................................... 44

TWENTY-FOURTH ........................................................................................................................................ 45

TWENTY-FIFTH ............................................................................................................................................ 45

October 18, 2008


8

OVERVIEW OF THE GRAND LODGE SYSTEM

Grand Lodge

Technical Title:

The Right Worshipful Grand Lodge of the Most Ancient and Honorable

Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons of Pennsylvania and Masonic

Jurisdiction Thereunto Belonging

The Grand Lodge is an unincorporated association.

To the extent not controlled by the Ahiman Rezon, the Grand Lodge must follow

the customary usages and principles of parliamentary law and procedure. 15

Pa.C.S.A. 9101. Interestingly, the Ahiman Rezon accordingly provides that

Parliamentary Law shall not apply to the Grand Lodge. Ahiman Rezon 9.15.

The Grand Lodge can receive unrestricted gifts for fraternal purposes. Liapis

Estate, 88 Pa. D. & C. 303 (C.P. Dauphin 1954).

Older law provides that the Grand Lodge cannot hold title to real estate in its

name for fraternal purposes, Hawk v. Hawk, 88 Pa. Superior Ct. 581 (1926),

but whether this law is still good is unclear. The Grand Lodge can probably

hold title to real estate in its name for charitable purposes, but direct authority

is unclear. To avoid this uncertainty, Grand Lodge uses the Trustees of Title

to the Masonic Temple and Other Real Estate of the Grand Lodge to hold

legal title to real estate.

The Grand Lodge can receive restricted and unrestricted gifts for charitable

purposes. Evangelical Association's Appeal, 35 Pa. 316 (1860).

The Grand Lodge can defend or maintain an action in its name. Pa.R.C.P.,

Rule 2153(a), (c).

The Grand Lodge as an entity can be charged with a crime if (1) the law

describing the crime specifically provides for that result or (2) the offense

consists of an omission to discharge a specific duty of affirmative

performance imposed on associations by law. 18 Pa.C.S. § 307. This is a

narrow standard. Unlike corporations, the Grand Lodge cannot be charged

simply because the commission of the offense was authorized, requested,

commanded, performed or recklessly tolerated by the board of directors or by

a high managerial agent acting in behalf of the corporation within the scope of

9

his office or employment. Because of this distinction, The Philadelphia

County Investigating Grand Jury of September 17, 2003 concluded that the

Philadelphia Archdiocese (an unincorporated association) could not be

charged with a crime arising from clerical abuse.

Grand Lodge members are generally not personally liable for the obligations

of the Grand Lodge, Duquesne Litho v. Roberts & Jaworski, 443 Pa. Super.

170 (1994), if care is taken to give notice that they do not intend to be

personally bound

Except where specific legal authority exists to recognize the corporate existence of the

Grand Lodge similar to the examples cited above, the Grand Lodge should be understood as a

collection of individuals. A trust is one of the tools Grand Lodge can use in certain cases to

accomplish corporate objectives that are not specifically authorized. See Article 13 of the

Ahiman Rezon for examples of how the Grand Lodge uses trusts, committees and corporations

in connection with its business activities.

Certain federal statutes do not easily accommodate unincorporated associations.

Structure of Grand Lodge:

Members:

Grand Officers, Past Grand Masters, Past Deputy Grand Masters, Past Grand Wardens by two

years’ service, Past Grand Treasurers and Secretaries by six years’ service, Past Masters by one

year’s service and the Masters and Wardens of Subordinate Lodges

Honorary Membership:

Grand Lodge may confer honorary membership on members in good standing; honorary

members may serve on committees but shall not be entitled to vote on Grand Lodge matters

Past Grand Masters and Past District Deputy Grand Masters:

Past Grand Masters and Past Deputy Grand Masters are life members of Grand Lodge

irrespective of an affiliation with a Subordinate Lodge

Representatives to the Grand Lodge:

Subordinate Lodges elect representatives to the Grand Lodge who represent the Subordinate

Lodge and the members of Grand Lodge who are members of the Subordinate Lodge at Grand

Lodge Communications

Communications:

Grand Lodge conducts its business through Communications, and the delegation of authority to a

system of committees, trustees, and directors

(a) Grand Lodge proceedings are governed by Article 9 of The Ahiman Rezon

10

(i) five Subordinate Lodges must be represented in order to open Grand

Lodge

(ii) Parliamentary law does not apply

(iii) Majority of members present (or voting if by ballot) controls all matters of

the Grand Lodge

(iv) Grand Master decides all questions of order, and there is no appeal from

his decision in this regard

(v) voice votes are permitted; standing votes may be required by five

members; votes by yeas and nays are not permissible

(vi) Representatives of fifteen Subordinate Lodges may require that any matter

before Grand Lodge be put to a ballot at which each member of Grand

Lodge shall have one vote; if this is done the matter should be tabled until

after Subordinate Lodges have received good notice of the matter and

have had a chance to consider and act upon it

(vii) Subordinate Lodges instruct representatives how to vote on a matter;

except that in the case of a ballot where Past Masters may direct

representatives to cast one vote specifically as he directs

Grand Officers:

Elected to two year terms at alternating December Quarterly Communications, subject to annual

reaffirmation ballot

(a) R.W. Grand Master

(b) R.W. Deputy Grand Master

(c) R.W. Senior Grand Warden

(d) R.W. Junior Grand Warden

(e) R.W. Grand Treasurer

(f) R.W. Grand Secretary

Officers of the Grand Lodge:

(a) Grand Officers

(b) Past Grand Masters, Deputy Grand Masters and Grand Wardens who having

served for at least two years1

1 Entitled to designation “Right Worshipful”

11

(c) Past Grand Secretaries and Grand Treasures having served for six years2

(d) Appointed Officers are not “officers” of Grand Lodge per se, but appointed to

fulfill the specific roles set forth in Article 12 of The Ahiman Rezon

Governance:

(a) Ancient usages, customs and landmarks of the Fraternity

(b) Constitution (The Ahiman Rezon)

(c) Grand Master

Tax Exemption:

Federal

Section 7701 of the Internal Revenue Code provides that an unincorporated association is a

“person” for tax purposes. Section 501(c) describes the types of persons which are exempt from

most federal income tax laws. Originally, Section 501(c) only recognized fraternal benefit

societies which provide life, sick, accident or other benefits to members. Original Section

501(c)(8) did not consider the distinction between entities which provide primarily fraternal

benefits and entities such as the Masons which provide charitable benefits to persons who

sometimes happen to be members. Congress eventually created 501(c)(10) to exempt domestic

fraternities the net earnings of which are devoted exclusively to religious, charitable, scientific,

literary, educational and fraternal purposes, and do not provide life, sick, accident or other

benefits to members. Around 1972, the Grand Lodge became a 501(c)(10) entity for purposes of

the Internal Revenue Code to take advantage of the change in the statute. Older IRS

determination letters refer to the Grand Lodge as being a 501(c)(8) organization, but this is no

longer correct.

Pennsylvania

Tax exemption under the Pennsylvania statute 12 P.S. § 375 is for the most part a highly factual

entitlement. Some aspects are discussed below, but two points which are sometimes confusing

are worth mentioning here however. Section (c)(1) of the Pennsylvania statute does not ask if

the institution is a 501(c)(3) organization. Rather, it asks if the institution avoids “private

inurement”, meaning that the property of the institution does not belong to the members and

cannot be paid as dividends or in liquidation to the members. Masonic bodies typically avoid

private inurement. Section (e)(5) of the Pennsylvania statute holds that certain types of

institutions are not charities for Pennsylvania purposes. A fraternal benefit society (Internal

Revenue Code Section 501(c)(8)) is not a Pennsylvania charity. The Grand Lodge and the

Subordinate Lodges are not fraternal benefit societies and are organized under Tax Code Section

501(c)(10). Generally, as long as a Subordinate Lodge provides a sufficient level of purely

charitable benefit as defined in the statute, it should be tax exempt for Pennsylvania purposes.

2 Entitled to designation “Right Worshipful”

12

Sales tax exemption, however, requires applying for a certificate and evaluation under

Pennsylvania law. Generally, Grand Lodge is not exempt from the real estate transfer tax,

although some transactions by Grand Lodge can fit into particular exceptions.

Gifts and Bequests to Grand Lodge:

Income tax treatment of charitable gifts

Three different sections of the Internal Revenue Code may be applicable to charitable

contributions to the Grand Lodge, its constituent elements and affiliates. Some elements and

affiliates have obtained an express exemption under Section 501(c)(3). Two additional sections

may be available for a gift to a fund or association that has not obtained an express 501(c)(3)

exemption. The most important is §170(c)(4) but §170(c)(2) is also available.

(a) 501(c)(3)

Most Masonic charities with an express charitable exemption are able to maintain

public charity status. This means there are generally no tax issues in making a charitable

contribution of any sort. If the Masonic charity is not organized as a corporation or trust, then

the charity will be an activity or fund of the unincorporated Masonic association that sponsors it.

The activity or fund can itself be a 501(c)(3) charity even though it is a constituent part of the

Grand Lodge or Subordinate Lodge and does not exist as a separate entity. Rev. Rul. 54-243.

For example, the Masonic Villages are recognized as a 501(c)(3) charity even though it is

actually just an “activity” of a 501(c)(10) Grand Lodge. This can be very confusing. However,

an activity or fund intending to be recognized as a 501(c)(3) charity must file for an express tax

exemption with the IRS.

(b) §170(c)(4)

(i) This section only applies to lifetime gifts made by individuals. Section

170(c)(4) provides a favorable result on all tax issues, so §170(c)(2) basically applies only to

gifts by partnerships, corporations, trusts, etc. to Masonic bodies without an express exemption.

This should be fairly rare. It is possible that gifts by “pass-through” entities would be treated as

gifts by individuals and thus qualified under §170(c)(4), but this is not clear.

(ii) The gift is made to the Grand Lodge itself, but Grand Lodge must be

directed to use the gift exclusively for charitable purposes and excluding fraternal purposes.

(c) §170(c)(2)

(i) As noted above, only partnerships, corporations, trusts, etc. would use this

section.

(ii) The gift is made to an “activity” (language used by the IRS) or “fund”

(language of the Tax Code) of the Grand Lodge. The intent to give to an activity or fund can be

implied when a gift specifies a particular charitable purpose which is an established activity or

fund.

13

(iii) If a regular corporation, and possibly partnerships and other pass-through

entity, makes a gift to the Grand Lodge for an activity or purpose that has not received a separate

501(c)(3) ruling, then the contributor may not be able to take a fair market value deduction for

contributions of appreciated property. Individual members of pass-through entities would be

subject to the 30% limitation, unless the contribution would be treated as qualifying under

§170(c)(4).

(iv) A major reason for creating the Masonic Charities Fund was to create a

solid basis for a charitable deduction to Masonic charitable purposes that have not themselves

received a 501(c)(3) exemption.

Gift tax treatment of charitable gifts

As a general rule, only individuals are subject to the gift tax. Section 2522 is essentially

identical to 170(c)(4), so lifetime gifts by an individual to the Grand Lodge exclusively for

charitable purposes do not create any tax issues.

Estate tax treatment of charitable gifts

Only individuals are subject to the estate tax. Section 2055 contains additional language not

contained in Section 2522.

Income tax treatment of fraternal gifts

No income tax deduction.

Gift tax treatment of fraternal gifts

This is a complicated topic. The IRS view is that any lifetime transfer for which the transferor

does not receive reasonably equivalent value in money or money’s worth generates gift tax. The

$12,000 annual exemption does not apply. In theory, if someone gives a dime to the fraternity in

excess of dues, he owes the IRS 5 cents (rounded up). The counter-argument starts with Carson

v. Commissioner, 71 T.C. 252 (1978). The case is about political contributions but can be

applied to fraternal gifts. The bottom line is that a brother should probably get tax advice before

making a large lifetime gift for fraternal purposes.

Estate tax treatment of fraternal gifts

No estate tax deduction.

Masonic Villages

Unincorporated unit of the Grand Lodge

The activities of the Masonic Villages are considered directly conducted by the Grand Lodge.

Although the assets employed for these purposes are owned by the Grand Lodge and not as a

14

trust, the assets are nevertheless impressed with a charitable purpose for Pennsylvania law

purposes. Craig Estate, 356 Pa. 564 (1947).

Governance:

The Grand Lodge ordinarily controls the operation of the Masonic Villages through the

Committee on Masonic Homes, which consists of the Grand Officers and seven additional

members of the Grand Lodge elected by the Grand Lodge. Elected terms are limited to eight

years. A.R. 13.32. The Grand Lodge has established rules for the operation of the Committee.

A.R. 13.34.

Tax Exemption:

The Masonic Villages has its own separate tax exemption as a 501(c)(3). Generally, this means

that there are no tax problems with contributions to the Masonic Villages directly.

Gifts and Bequests:

The Masonic Villages are exclusively charitable. They are a public charity, which generally

means there are no issues for any type of individual gifts during life or at death. Gifts by non-

individual donors may want to specify any gift is made to the Masonic Villages itself as distinct

from its endowment fund or to the Masonic Charities Fund.

The Masonic Library and Museum of Pennsylvania:

Pennsylvania Non-Profit Corporation:

The Masonic Library and Museum of Pennsylvania is a Pennsylvania non-profit corporation

controlled by the Grand Lodge. Its extensive purposes are described in A.R. 13.42. It operates

within the Masonic Temple in Philadelphia but does not own it. The Masonic Library and

Museum of Pennsylvania also conducts programs and exhibits throughout the state in

cooperation with Subordinate Lodges.

Governance:

The Grand Lodge ordinarily controls the operation of the Masonic Library and Museum of

Pennsylvania through a Board of Directors consisting of the Grand Officers, the Chairmen of

certain standing committees of the Board and others appointed by the Grand Master.

Tax Exemption:

The Masonic Library and Museum of Pennsylvania has its own separate tax exemption as a

501(c)(3).

15

Gifts and Bequests:

The Masonic Library and Museum of Pennsylvania is exclusively charitable. It is a public

charity, and in this case there are generally no issues for any type of donors.

The Masonic Youth Foundation of Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania Non-Profit Corporation

Governance:

The Masonic Youth Foundation of Pennsylvania is a Pennsylvania non-profit corporation

controlled by the Grand Lodge through a Board of Directors appointed by the Grand Master. It

is the successor to two prior Masonic non-profit corporations. Its purposes are described in A.R.

13.39.

Tax Exemption:

The Masonic Youth Foundation of Pennsylvania has its own separate tax exemption as a

501(c)(3).

Gifts and Bequests:

The Masonic Youth Foundation of Pennsylvania is exclusively charitable. It is a public charity,

and in this case there are generally no issues for any type of donors.

Masonic Blood and Organ Donor Club of Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania Non-Profit Corporation

Governance:

The Masonic Blood and Organ Donor Club of Pennsylvania is a Pennsylvania non-profit

corporation controlled by the Grand Lodge through a Board of Directors appointed by the Grand

Master.

Tax Exemption:

The Masonic Blood and Organ Donor Club of Pennsylvania has its own separate tax exemption

as a 501(c)(3).

Gifts and Bequests:

The Masonic Blood and Organ Donor Club of Pennsylvania is exclusively charitable. It is a

public charity, and in this case there are generally no issues for any type of donors.

16

The Masonic Charities Fund

Pennsylvania Trust

The Masonic Charities Fund is a perpetual Pennsylvania charitable Trust. The Masonic Charities

Fund has a flexible mission to coordinate and conduct gift planning and development functions

for the charitable activities of the Grand Lodge and its charitable components and affiliates.

Governance:

Trustees:

The Trustees of the Masonic Charities Fund are the Grand Officers, who follow the terms of the

Trust Agreement (See AR Section 13.04)

Tax Exemption:

The Masonic Charities Fund has its own separate tax exemption as a 501(c)(3).

Gifts and Bequests:

The Masonic Charities Fund is exclusively charitable. It is a public charity, and in this case there

are generally no issues for any type of donors.

Subordinate Lodges Unincorporated associations warranted and constituted by Grand Lodge and subject to

governance by Grand Lodge

A Subordinate Lodge is a Pennsylvania unincorporated association. Each Subordinate Lodge is

governed by the Ahiman Rezon as the constitution of Pennsylvania Freemasonry. In effect, each

Subordinate Lodge owns its property in trust for the Grand Lodge. Upon dissolution, all

property must be disposed of in accordance with A.R. 17.22. The Warrant issued by the Grand

Lodge creating the Subordinate Lodge must be displayed in order to open a Subordinate Lodge.

Governance:

(a) Ancient customs, usages and landmarks of the Fraternity

(b) The Ahiman Rezon

(c) Digest of Decisions

(d) Grand Master Edicts

(e) Lodge Bylaws

17

Tax Exemption:

Fraternal

A Subordinate Lodge has a group exemption as a 501(c)(10) domestic non-benefit fraternal

society.

Charitable funds

The charitable funds of a Subordinate Lodge are exclusively charitable. They are exempt as an

integral part of a 501(c)(10) entity. A 1958 IRS ruling implies that charitable funds of

Subordinate Lodges may also be considered 501(c)(3) charities, but this is not clear. Some

charitable funds of Subordinate Lodges may have received an express 501(c)(3) ruling.

Gifts and bequests:

Fraternal

No income tax deduction is available. For gift tax, modest life time gifts are probably not

taxable, but see the discussion at 1.7.5. No estate tax deduction is available.

Charitable funds

If a Subordinate Lodge has received a 501(c) ruling, generally no problem should arise. For

individual donors, §170(c)(4) will generally be sufficient, but other donors should consult with

tax advisors or work through the Masonic Charities Fund.

Temple and Hall Associations

Pennsylvania non-profit corporations

Pennsylvania Temple and Hall Associations must be organized as Pennsylvania nonprofit

corporations or trusts. Hall Associations do not file audits with the Grand Lodge.

Purpose:

The sole purpose of a Temple and Hall Associations is to hold title to assets for Subordinate

Lodges and appendant Masonic bodies. Typically, the asset will be real estate. Generally the

interested Subordinate Lodges and appendant Masonic bodies which formed the Association

control it.

Governance:

The Grand Lodge has published model bylaws for the Hall Associations. In order to protect the

interests of its Subordinate Lodges, Grand Lodge requires certain governance features to be

18

present in the bylaws and amendments thereto to be approved by the Grand Lodge Committee on

Bylaws.

The Grand Lodge has the right, and in some cases the responsibility, to (i) inspect the operations

of Hall Associations to ensure compliance with applicable Masonic and civil law and (ii) to insist

upon approval of certain transactions, including the sale of real estate owned by the Hall

Association for use by Interested Masonic Bodies.

See Paragraph 62.10 in the Digest of Decisions.

Tax Exemption:

An Association is a 501(c)(2) entity. No tax deduction is available for a contribution to an

Association. An Association can charge rent to its users, but its net income must be remitted

annually to the Subordinate Lodges and appendant Masonic bodies which formed it. Income can

be used to pay expenses, and depreciation counts as an expense for this purpose.

If the Association borrows money, unrelated business income could be generated and the

Association could lose its tax exemption.

Special rules apply if more than one Masonic body owns an Association. Among other items,

the governance documents must contain cross-purchase terms and the Association can only own

real property and tangible property connected with real property.

Associations do not need to file a tax return if they normally earn less than $5,000. “Normally”

means on average over the organization’s final three tax years in operation. Treas. Reg. §

1.6043-3(d)(2), cross reference to Treas. Reg. § 1.6033-2(g)(3)(iii). A return is almost always

needed if an Association earns unrelated business taxable income. An Association with a single

owner can file a consolidated return with its owner.

Salary payments to officers and employees can generate payroll taxes.

The 501(c)(2) entity will lose its exemption if the interested Masonic owners lose their

exemptions.

Scope of Operation:

A 501(c)(2) entity is not allowed to conduct an active business. Operating social facilities like a

bar and buffet is an active business and is not permitted to the 501(c)(2) unless the all-volunteer

labor exception applies. A small amount of tangible property can be leased in connection with

real estate. An Association cannot provide services with a lease.

Distribution of proceeds upon sale:

Generally speaking, Hall Associations may only sell the real estate owned for Masonic purposes

after first (i) making a recommendation to the interested Masonic bodies, and (ii) having the

19

recommendation approved by a majority of the interests in the Hall Association after good and

timely notice to the members of the interested Masonic bodies. The resolutions should authorize

the directors or specific officers of the Hall Association to carry out the transaction according to

specified terms or parameters.

If the Hall Association and/or the Lodges are subject to a local business privilege tax, then the

sale may give rise to tax obligations thereunder. Depending on the identity of the buyer and the

nature of the transaction, the sale will probably be subject to Pennsylvania and local realty

transfer tax.

The sale of the 501(c)(2)’s assets will generally terminate its tax exemption. The IRS deems this

change in status to occur on the day after the sale. See, e.g., PLR 9551021. Unless the Hall

Association qualifies for exemption under some other section of the Internal Revenue Code, it

will thus be subject to federal income tax (as well as Pennsylvania corporate net income tax) on

all income received after the date of the sale. The sale should be structured so that all

consideration for the property will be accrued, if not actually received, at the time of sale. If the

Hall Association stands to generate or realize any other forms of income, it should be sure to do

so no later than the date of the sale. The assets should be distributed proportionately to the

owners. An owner should have owned an interest for at least two years.

There are a number of steps involved in winding up a Hall Association. The owners should

obtain clearance certificates from PA Dept of Revenue (longest lead time) and PA Dept of Labor

and file withdrawal with PA Dept of State. This will require advertisement and certain notice to

the local authorities. No real estate transfer tax due on liquidation if the real property is outside

Philadelphia. Philadelphia is one of the localities that might impose a business tax, so tax

planning is essential.

October 18, 2008


20

Sources of Masonic Law

1. Ancient customs, usages and landmarks of the fraternity: Unlike most jurisdictions, the

Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania does not record any special list of landmarks (such as

Albert Mackey’s list of 25 landmarks). If the question of a landmark arises, it is referred

to the Committee on Landmarks for further consideration. The landmarks are said to be

from time immemorial and unalterable by any authority.

2. The Ahiman Rezon is the Constitution of the Grand Lodge and its primary governance

document. It may only be amended in accordance with Article 25, which provides that

any amendment must be proposed in writing at the annual Grand Communication, or at

the March or June Quarterly Communications and then considered at the next December

Quarterly Communication.

3. The Digest of Decisions represents authoritative interpretations of Ahiman Rezon by the

Grand Lodge, its committees, and Grand Masters, concerning the operation of lodges and

the conduct of members.

4. Edicts of the Grand Master have the authority of Masonic law. (See AR § 12.03)

5. Lodge and Hall Association By-Laws. Every Lodge and Hall association should have

by-laws which provide for their respective government. Such by-laws may not be

consistent with the Ahiman Rezon or the model by-laws approved by the Grand Lodge

Committee on By-Laws from time to time. All such by-laws, and any amendments to

them, must be delivered to the Committee on By-Laws for review and are thereafter

subject to Grand Lodge approval. (See AR § 17.15)

October 18, 2008


21

MASONIC CHARGES, TRIALS, APPEALS MASONIC DISCIPLINE

Masonic Charges

In writing

Masonic charges must be in writing and in general form, either (a) conduct unbecoming a

Mason, or (b) gross un-Masonic conduct.

Examples: “drunkenness, profanity and blasphemy, undue solicitation for candidates,

visiting irregular or clandestine lodges, abuse of ballot, adultery, violation of the

particular injunctions of the ritual or any of the landmarks, violation of the Constitution,

laws, edicts, rules bylaws or regulations of the Grand Lodge or the Subordinate Lodge

and cruel treatment of wife, child or other member of one’s family.”

Insolvency is not a Masonic Offense.” (See DD Section 19.3.)

Sufficiently explicit

Masonic charges must be sufficiently explicit information must be included to permit an

understanding of their nature by the lodge, including the time and place at which Masonic

offenses were committed by the accused.

Experienced member

Masonic charges must be prepared or reviewed by an experienced member, and then submitted

to the DDGM having jurisdiction, provided he is not a member of the lodge in which the charges

will be preferred.

Secretary

Masonic charges must be submitted to the Secretary and read by the Secretary to the Lodge.

Accuser

Masonic charges must be brought by an accuser who is a member in good standing, but need not

be in the same lodge as the accused.

Accused

Masonic charges must be made against an accused who is a member of a Pennsylvania

Subordinate Lodge or a member of a lodge in another jurisdiction bur residing in Pennsylvania;

if the accused is a Pennsylvania Mason residing in another jurisdiction, he may be tried and

punished for a Masonic offense in the jurisdiction of his residence.

22

Lodge may not act against a member who has resigned for conducted committed before

his resignation.

Lodge may act against a member that has resigned and is unaffiliated for conduct

committed after such resignation.

Worshipful Master

Masonic charges against the Master must be filed in the Grand Lodge

Civil Proceedings

Masonic charges where an adequate remedy is available through civil proceedings are not

recognized unless the conduct giving rise to such a dispute represents a Masonic offense

Disputes arising from business transactions between members should not be the subject

of Masonic trials, unless there is an allegation of a Masonic offense.

Withdrawn

Masonic charges may be withdrawn only with the consent of the Grand Lodge

Lodge Action Masonic charges must be referred to a committee to determine whether a trial is necessary, or (b)

sent to a committee appointed by the Master to conduct a trial

Lodge secretary may serve on a trial committee and be the secretary of thereof

The accuser may not be on the trial committee

Trials (a) If referred to a trial committee, Secretary prepares and delivers to committee a certified

copy of the charges and specifications

(b) Trial committee elects a Chairman and Secretary

(c) Chairman oversees and directs trial committee; secretary prepares notices, and keeps

detailed and accurate records

(d) Once the trial committee is organized, Master issues summons to the accused notifying

him of the charges preferred and other information concerning the handling of the matter

(e) Accused has at least three days’ notice of all meetings of the trial committee; it is

important to serve the accused in strict accordance with Section 10, 10.01.2 of the

Charges, Ceremonies and Forms

Accused has the right to have Masonic counsel

23

(f) Accused and accuser are each permitted to have a member present on his behalf at all

meetings of the Trial Committee

(g) Testimony shall be taken stenographically (by a mason stenographer if possible)

(h) Masons testify on their Masonic oaths; others under civil oaths given by someone

authorized to administer such oaths

(i) If required, testimony may be given through interrogatories and cross-interrogatories; ex

parte affidavits are not permitted

(j) Accused and accuser are permitted to put on all evidence that they believe to be

beneficial to their respective positions

(k) Trial committee convenes privately to consider the evidence, make findings and prepare a

report to the lodge

(l) The report must conclude with the finding that the charge or charges and specifications

were approved or not approved or approved as to a portion of such charges and

specifications.

(m) Notify the accused of the stated meeting at which the report is to be made to the lodge.

(n) Trial Committee presents report to the lodge and the lodge acts on the same.

(o) Lodge must either act at the meeting at which the report is made to the lodge or at the

next regular stated meeting of the lodge without any further postponement.

(p) Lodge must act on the report of the Committee and accurately record such action.

(q) If the trial results in a conviction, the penalty must be either suspension or expulsion

absolutely; suspensions may not be for a specified period.

(r) An accused as the right to address the lodge either personally or by counsel before the

lodge acts on the Committee’s report; the accused must leave the room prior to the vote.

(s) If the accused believes that improper evidence was admitted or proper evidence was

rejected, he may bring the same to the lodge’s attention at the time of his address or may

present his exceptions to the lodge in writing prior to the vote on the Committee’s report.

(t) Master notifies the accused of the lodge’s action on the matter.

(u) In the case where charges are brought against a member who has been tried and

convicted in a court of law for a violation of any federal or state law, the only charge and

specification necessary is a certified copy of the court record. In such cases, the lodge

must vote guilty and either suspend or expel the member. The District Deputy Grand

Master may advance the Grand Master of such a conviction and the Grand Master may,

24

without any further action being required of the lodge, direct the suspension or expulsion

of the accused and convicted member.

(v) An expelled or suspended member may apply to stay the meeting of the lodge for the

removal of the expulsion or suspension. If the majority of the members present vote to

recommend removal of the suspension or expulsion, such lodge shall request the Grand

Lodge to effect the removal of the suspension or expulsion and after it is removed, the

applicant may petition for membership in the same manner and subject to the same rules

and regulations governing the proceedings in cases of petitions for membership.

(w) The Secretary must file the entire trial with the Grand Secretary and maintain the record

up to date with the Grand Secretary from time to time.

(x) Master may direct how the vote of the lodge shall be taken; either a voice vote or a ballot

box is acceptable; a majority vote adopts or rejects the report of the Trial Committee.

Appeals (a) The accused, any member of the lodge, or any affiliated Mason who believes that a

wrong has been done to the interests of Free Masonry by the action of the lodge, may

appeal to the Grand Lodge within six months after the final action of the lodge and the

matter shall then be referred to the Committee on Appeals.

(b) The Committee on Appeals may review the matter based upon the written record alone,

or require the production of additional testimony through hearing.

(c) The Committee on Appeals shall present its report to the Grand Lodge and the Grand

Lodge shall take final action with respect thereto and there shall be no appeal from such

action of the Grand Lodge.

(d) The Committee on Appeals shall be appointed and act in conformance with Sections

13.10 through 13.14 of The Ahiman Rezon.

Other Forms of Masonic Discipline (a) The Grand Master has the constitutional and inherent power to censure, suspend and/or

expel summarily, unilaterally and/or otherwise any member of the Grand Lodge and/or

any member of a subordinate lodge under the jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge.

October 18, 2008


25

MISCELLANEOUS

MATERIALS

October 18, 2008


26

MASONIC ORGANIZATION CHART

October 18, 2008


27

ANTIDISCRIMINATION LAWS AND PENNSYLVANIA FREEMASONRY

Background According to Albert Mackey, “[i]t is an unquestionable Landmark of the [Masonic]

Order, and the very first pre-requisite to initiation, that the candidate shall be ‘a man.’ This of

course prohibits the initiation of a woman.”3 Although the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania

(“Grand Lodge”) does not record or recognize any list of Landmarks,4 but rather refers questions

touching upon them to the Committee on Landmarks,5 we all know, at least, that the Grand

Lodge requires that a candidate for a lodge working under its jurisdiction be a male.

Judicial decisions requiring the integration of other exclusively male memberships have

made the headlines, leaving many Pennsylvania Masons asking whether the Grand Lodge will be

forced to integrate its membership. This paper summarizes the relevant federal and Pennsylvania

civil rights laws insofar as they affect the maintenance of exclusively male membership

organizations for fraternal societies in Pennsylvania.

Freedom of Association No federal or Pennsylvania law explicitly allows or prohibits the operation of an

exclusively male membership organization as a general proposition. Instead, exclusively male

membership organizations exist at the intersection of two major legal principles. The first of

these principles is the freedom of association. The U.S. Constitution guarantees freedom of

association to every citizen, and the freedom to associate has generally been said to include or

imply a freedom not to associate. Accordingly, organizations are generally said to be free to

select, or refuse to select, any individuals or class of individuals as members.

This freedom is not absolute, however. It is bounded by the second principle, the

government’s power to intervene where freedom of association is being exercised in such a way

as to work a significant harm. Since American law universally (although not uniformly)

recognizes discrimination against women as a significant harm justifying governmental

intervention, this limiting principle is always at least potentially in play for exclusively male

organizations. Most states, including Pennsylvania, have tied their intervention to the concept of

public accommodation. They have said (in effect) that they will not generally interfere with an

3 Masonic Jurisprudence, Albert G. Mackey, M.D., Clark & Maynard Publishers, 1870 (p. 96).

4 Ancient Landmarks of Freemasonry, The Masonic Service Association, 1932 (p. 35).

5 The Ahiman Rezon, Article 13, Section 13.09.

28

organization’s right to exclude women from membership, unless the rules of membership have

the effect of denying women access to public accommodations. In Pennsylvania, this principle is

codified in Section 955 of the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act.

That same section also includes a special exception for membership-based activities of

fraternal associations. As a result, the bottom-line rule for Pennsylvania fraternal associations is

that they are free to limit membership to men, and to conduct activities open only to members;

however, to the extent they offer activities or facilities to the general public, they must do so on a

non-discriminatory basis.

U.S. Supreme Court

Roberts v. Unites States Jaycees, 468 U.S. 609 (1984).

The dispute underlying this case began in the early 1970s, when the Minneapolis and St.

Paul chapters of the Jaycees began admitting women as full members in contravention of the

Jaycees’ national bylaws. When the national organization moved to revoke the local charters,

the chapters filed charges of discrimination under the Minnesota Human Rights Act. That Act,

which is similar to many other state human rights acts around the country, provides that it is

unlawful to “deny any person the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities,

privileges advantages and accommodations of a place of public accommodation because of…

sex.” After losing before the Minnesota Supreme Court on all counts, including a claim that the

organization did not constitute a “place of public accommodation” under the relevant state

statute, the national organization went to federal court to press claims that the Minnesota Human

Rights Act infringed on freedoms of association conferred by the U.S. Constitution.

The Supreme Court began by describing two distinct forms of constitutionally guaranteed

freedom of association. “Intrinsic” or “intimate” freedom of association is the right “to enter into

and maintain certain intimate human relationships.” “Instrumental” or “expressive” freedom of

association is the right “to associate for the purpose of engaging in… speech, assembly, petition

for the redress of grievances, and the exercise of religion.” The Court then considered separately

whether the Minnesota statute infringed on either of these freedoms.

In regard to intimate association, the court reasoned that constitutional protection is

highest where the relationships in question are relatively few in number, are formed and

maintained with a relatively high degree of selectivity, and are carried on in relative seclusion

from others. The Court found that the Jaycees were a large and essentially nonselective group

that conducted no background checks on potential members, and rarely if ever rejected any

applicant. Furthermore, the Jaycees allowed and indeed encouraged non-members (including

women) to participate in a wide range of organizational meetings and programs. The Court

concluded that the Jaycees lacked the characteristics that would warrant any significant degree of

protection for the right of intimate association.

In regard to expressive association, the Court weighed the State’s interest in curbing

discrimination against the magnitude of the actual infringement imposed upon the organization.

The Court found that the State had a compelling interest in eradicating discrimination against its

29

female citizens, and that it was rational and proper to consider leadership skills “goods” and

business contacts “advantages” under the State Act in order to carry that compelling interest to

activities such as those of the Jaycees. On the other hand, the Court found no basis for

concluding that the inclusion of women would impede the types of expressive activities

traditionally carried on by the organization. The Court specifically rejected the idea that the

exclusion of women was, as a symbol in itself, a protected expression of the organization’s creed

or identity.

Having thus found no undue infringement of either type of freedom of association, and

having found that the Minnesota Act was a reasonable means of achieving a compelling state

interest, the Court ruled in favor of the local chapters. This effectively struck the males-only

provision from the bylaws of the national organization, at least in regard to operations in any

state with a comparable anti-discrimination statute.

Rotary International v. Rotary Club of Duarte, 481 U.S. 537 (1987).

Much like the Jaycees’ dispute, this case arose when a local Rotary chapter that had

begun admitting women had its charter revoked by the national organization. The local chapter

filed discrimination charges against the national organization, this time under the California civil

rights act known as the Unruh Act. After losing before the California Supreme Court on all

counts, including a claim that the organization did not constitute a “business establishment”

under the Unruh Act, the national organization appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court on the theory

that the Unruh Act improperly infringed on freedoms of association conferred under the U.S.

Constitution.

The Court closely followed the reasoning and structure of its previous Jaycees decision.

In regard to intimate association, it found that Rotary chapters deserve no particular protection

because (i) they are relatively large, with anywhere from 20 to several hundred members; (ii)

they are relatively unselective, despite certain rules for qualification, with local chapters being

instructed to admit all fully qualified applicants within their respective territories; and (iii)

instead of “carrying on their activities in an atmosphere of privacy,” the clubs actively seek

publicity and the participation of non-members in a range of core activities including chapter

meetings.

In regard to expressive association, the Court found no evidence that the admission of

women would impair the members’ ongoing expressive activities, and noted in particular that as

a matter of policy Rotary clubs do not take positions on political or international issues. Having

thus found no undue infringement, the Court once again upheld the State statute and effectively

removed the males-only provision of the national bylaws as practiced in most jurisdictions.

The Pennsylvania Human Relations Act The Pennsylvania Human Relations Act (43 P.S. § 951 et seq., the “Act”) provides a

variety of protections against discrimination based on factors including sex. It is the

Pennsylvania counterpart to the Minnesota and California statutes tested in the Jaycees and

Rotary Club cases described above.

30

Section 955 of the Act enumerates a range of unlawful discriminatory practices, most of

which involve employment- or housing-related practices. Section 955(i) enumerates two

unlawful practices in regard to the operation of a “place of public accommodation.” Section

955(i)(1) makes it illegal to deny any individual, based on a range of factors including sex,

access to “any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities or privileges” of any place of public

accommodation. Section 955(i)(2) makes it illegal to advertise or otherwise publicize that any

person will be barred or discouraged, based on a range of factors including sex, from enjoying

any degree of access to any place of public accommodation.

Section 954 of the Act defines “public accommodation” in relevant part as:

any accommodation, resort or amusement which is open to, accepts or soli-

cits the patronage of the general public, including but not limited to inns, ta-

verns, roadhouses, hotels, motels, whether conducted for the entertainment

of transient guests or for the accommodation of those seeking health, recre-

ation or rest, or restaurants or eating houses, or any place where food is sold

for consumption on the premises, buffets, saloons, barrooms or any store,

park or enclosure where spiritous or malt liquors are sold, ice cream parlors,

confectioneries, soda fountains and all stores where ice cream, ice and fruit

preparations or their derivatives, or where beverages of any kind are retailed

for consumption on the premises, drug stores, dispensaries, clinics, hos-

pitals, bathhouses, swimming pools, barber shops, beauty parlors, retail

stores and establishments, theatres, motion picture houses, airdromes, roof

gardens, music halls, race courses, skating rinks, amusement and recreation

parks, fairs, bowling alleys, gymnasiums, shooting galleries, billiard and

pool parlors, public libraries, kindergartens, primary and secondary schools,

high schools, academies, colleges and universities, extension courses and all

educational institutions under the supervision of this Commonwealth, non-

sectarian cemeteries, garages and all public conveyances operated on land

or water or in the air as well as the stations, terminals and airports thereof,

financial institutions and all Commonwealth stations, terminals and airports

thereof, financial institutions and all Commonwealth facilities and services,

including such facilities and services of all political subdivisions thereof,

but shall not include any accommodations which are in their nature dis-

tinctly private.

None of the acts prohibited under § 955 apply to discrimination based on membership in

a fraternal association, by virtue of an exception stated in the introductory paragraph of that

section. In effect, that exception clarifies that an activity or facility offered only to members of a

fraternity will not be deemed to have been offered to the “general public” within the meaning of

the definition above, and will be deemed to be of a “distinctly private” nature. However, if a

fraternity offers an activity or facility, and includes some participants and excludes others on a

basis other than membership in the fraternity, then the exception for fraternal activities does not

apply and an excluded individual may be able to bring an action for discrimination under § 955.

31

Philadelphia Electric Co. v. Human Relations Commission, 5 Pa. Commw. 329 (1972).

This dispute arose when the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission attempted to

exert regulatory jurisdiction over programs and billing practices of a public utility, pursuant to

the Act, on the theory that some of the utility’s facilities constituted “places of public

accommodation.” There was no nexus between the contested practices and the service offices

that constituted public accommodations, except that both were maintained by the utility. The

court found that the Act did not create such general jurisdiction, but that in crafting the Act “the

Legislature means a place of public accommodation to be a physical location to which the

general public is invited to do business,” and the Legislature does not intend for the Act to apply

to “all activities of any person who maintains, without suggestion of discrimination, a place of

public accommodation.”

Human Relations Commission v. Loyal Order of Moose, Lodge No. 107, 448 Pa. 451 (1972).

This dispute arose when a member of Moose Lodge No. 107 brought an African-

American guest into the Lodge’s dining facility, and the party was refused service. The guest

sued under the Act, and the Pa. Supreme Court eventually heard the case to determine whether

the Lodge’s dining room qualified as a “place of public accommodation.” The Court noted that

members were free to bring any Caucasian guests, including women and children ineligible for

membership in the Lodge, into the dining facility. The Lodge also routinely rented the facility to

other organizations, regardless of any membership or other affiliation. The court found that

these practices negated the private nature of the facility, and made it a place of public

accommodation. The Court noted that the Act “does grant to fraternal organizations the right to

discriminate on any basis upon which they desire to discriminate, but only when those actions

are based on membership.” Having opened the dining facility to non-members, the fraternity

could not do so on a discriminatory basis.

Loyal Order of Moose, Lodge No. 145 v. Human Relations Commission, 16 Pa. Commw. 433 (1974).

This dispute arose when two African-American children were barred, on the basis of their

race, from participating in a youth bowling league operated by a Moose Lodge in its own facility.

The Lodge had adopted written policies that African-Americans were not eligible for

membership in the Lodge, and that the league was open only to children and grandchildren of

Lodge members. In respect to the league, however, the policy had not been enforced for some

time, and many of the participants were Caucasian children with no family affiliation to the

Lodge. The court ruled that notwithstanding a written policy to the contrary, the Lodge had in

fact offered the league to the public on a basis not connected to membership, thus making the

32

bowling alley a “place of public accommodation,” and had done so in an illegally discriminatory

manner.

In a distinct section of the ruling, concerning remedies available to the Human Relations

Commission, the court overturned an order to the effect that the Lodge could not shut down the

league, but must continue to operate the league as a public accommodation. The court found that

the Lodge had a right to shut the league down if it so chose, and that the Commission could

intervene in the operation of the league only so long as it was an ongoing operation conducted in

a discriminatory manner.

Recent Oregon Decision The Court of Appeals of the State of Oregon has very recently ruled that the Fraternal

Order of Eagles must accept female members in that state, pursuant to Oregon’s Public

Accommodations Act. Lahmann v. Grand Aerie of Fraternal Order of Eagles, 99C-17528,

A122320 (October 12, 2005). The Oregon dispute involved both law and facts that are clearly

distinct from those relevant to the Grand Lodge’s activities in Pennsylvania. First, the Oregon

law is quite unlike the Act, in that Oregon does not provide any statutory exception for fraternal

associations in the general scheme of its discrimination law. Furthermore, the Aerie in which the

dispute arose maintained a bar and dining facility which was frequented by both men and

women, and the court appeared to view the operation of this facility as the Aerie’s primary

activity. Given these key factors, it was a relatively straightforward matter for the Oregon court

to conclude that the hall constituted a place of public accommodation, and that the Aerie was not

exempt from the statutory requirement of providing access to that accommodation on a

nondiscriminatory basis.

What was not straightforward was the court’s conclusion that a legal requirement to

provide access to the dining hall on a nondiscriminatory basis necessarily involved the

integration of the fraternity itself, including rituals and meetings that were not open to women or

non-members. The Grand Aerie does not appear to have challenged the court’s logic in this

regard. Given the breadth and showmanship of the public-policy rationales offered by both the

majority and the dissent, this could be taken to illustrate how this type of dispute may involve

more of an ideological shoving match than a careful reading of the law. Perhaps the Aerie will

pursue a more measured defense if it succeeds in bringing the dispute to the Oregon Supreme

Court.

Conclusion Even under general principles of public accommodation law, and without the special

protection afforded to fraternal associations under the relevant Pennsylvania statute, the Grand

Lodge may be entitled to constitutional protections that were not available to the Jaycees or the

Rotary Club. These come not in regard to expressive freedoms, since the Grand Lodge’s

expressive activities are probably not significantly different from those of the other two

organizations, but rather in regard to distinctive elements of intimate association that are

characteristic of Grand Lodge activities. The Grand Lodge may be said to be a relatively

33

exclusive organization. More importantly, and much more dramatically, the Grand Lodge have a

diametrically different stance in regard to organizational privacy. Since non-members are barred

from core fraternal meetings and activities, and indeed may not even learn of those proceedings

indirectly, the Grand Lodge might rely on the Supreme Court’s own analytic language (from

Jaycees) to claim that the relations they share are, in a constitutionally significant sense, uniquely

intimate in nature.

Furthermore, Pennsylvania law appears to go further than the laws of Minnesota and

California in providing that a place of public accommodation must be a physical location. This

would appear to provide another layer of protection to a fraternal association as an organization,

independent of its various places of operation.

While Grand Lodge practice and local law therefore provide several means of saving

Pennsylvania Grand Lodge from the fate of the Rotary and Jaycees organizations, it is highly

unlikely that Grand Lodge will need to resort to any such means in the foreseeable future.

Current Pennsylvania law provides no apparent basis for a discrimination claim based on the

exclusion of women from fraternal activities. Any activity or facility offered to members of the

fraternity, but not to any others, appears to be well protected as being private in nature and not

subject to the Act.

Of course Grand Lodge also offers a wide range of programs, activities and facilities to

members of the public, and many of these offerings involve places of public accommodation

within the meaning of the Act. So long as these are offered on a nondiscriminatory basis, and are

kept clearly distinct from core activities of the fraternity such as meetings of the Grand Lodge

and subordinate lodges, it does not appear that the Act provides any basis for attacking the all-

male nature of the fraternity itself. Indeed, the Act provides that it is not to be used for that

purpose.

Many of the programs and facilities offered to the general public by the Grand Lodge are

offered in the context of charitable, rather than fraternal, activities. Since charitable activities are

subject to a separate set of prohibitions against discrimination, and those prohibitions are based

on entirely separate logic concerning permissible and impermissible distinctions between classes

of beneficiaries, nothing in this memo should be taken to suggest that the Grand Lodge is free to

exclude women as beneficiaries of its charitable undertakings.

Note also that this paper is limited to the law of public accommodations, and should not

be taken to indicate that Grand Lodge or any of its affiliates or subsidiaries may be exempted

from prohibitions on discrimination in employment or housing. On the contrary, Pennsylvania

law is clear that fraternal associations are generally subject to prohibitions on discrimination in

those regards.

October 18, 2008


34

REAL ESTATE TAX EXEMPTIONS

Real Estate Tax Exemption.

The legal framework is complex.

It is very difficult to predict the outcome of an application for real estate tax exemption.

Exemption does not rest on any single standard, or even a single set of rules. It rests instead on

the interplay of the following two determinations, which are discussed in more detail below:

(a) the institution requesting exemption must be a “purely public charity” within the meaning

of the Pennsylvania Constitution; and,

(b) The property in question must be held and used as described under at least one of the

forms of exemption set forth in the General County Assessment Law (the “Assessment

Law”).

Act 55

The Legislature’s enactment of Act 55 has failed to settle the question of how one goes about

determining whether an organization is an institution of purely public charity. Some judges are

inclined to credit Act 55 as a codification of relevant jurisprudence; others disdain the attempt by

the legislature to define a term set forth in the Constitution, and insist on analyses based in

common law.

Exemption

Each claim for exemption rests on a broad inquiry into specific operational circumstances, and

the breadth of that inquiry tends to reward the institution or taxing authority best able to frame

those circumstances. While Act 55 attempts to provide tools for reducing complex operations to

a few key proportions or indicators, it falls far short of making the determination of

“charitability” into a science. Indeed, even under Act 55, the fight for exemption is often won or

lost on the basis of how particular operations are described or measured, before any strictly legal

disputes are reached.

Qualifying As An “Institution Of Purely Public Charity”

As note above, not all Pennsylvania judges have submitted to the idea that Act 55 provides the

proper measure of what constitutes an “institution of purely public charity.” Nevertheless, Act

55 should be the template for planning and presenting that component of an application for

exemption. The five elements of qualification under Act 55 as an institution of public charity are

briefly described below:

35

Charitable Purpose

The institution must advance a charitable purpose. It is deemed to do so if it is organized and

operated primarily to fulfill one or more enumerated purposes including relief of poverty,

advancement and provision of education, advancement of religion, prevention and treatment of

disease and injury, government or municipal purposes, and any other purpose “recognized as

important and beneficial to the public and which advances social, moral or physical objectives.”

Free from Private Profit Motive

The institution must operate entirely free from private profit motive. This requirement overlaps

substantially with similar requirements for qualification under § 501(c)(3) of the Internal

Revenue Code. This does not mean, however, that the institution must have a 501(c)(3)

exemption.

Substantial Portion

The institution must donate or render gratuitously a substantial portion of its services. This is

known generally as the “community benefit” requirement and it is the prong that gives retirement

living and continuing care organizations the most trouble. Act 55 provides seven sets of

formulae and standards for calculating whether an institution meets this requirement. An

institution will qualify if it satisfies any one of these tests.

Subjects of Charity

The institution must benefit a substantial and indefinite class of persons who are legitimate

subjects of charity. Courts have traditionally required that the class of persons will not qualify as

legitimate subjects of charity unless there is some quantifiable and demonstrable element of

poverty as well. There has been some movement away from this principle, at least with respect

to retirement communities seeking tax exemption. In its 2002 decision in Grace Center

Community Living Corp., the Commonwealth Court has affirmed that “senior citizens are

appropriate objects of charity not solely on the basis of financial need but also on the basis of

emotional, social and physical challenges which increase with age.”

Relieve Government

The institution must relieve the government of some of its burden. It will automatically be

deemed to do so if it has a PILOT or SILOT agreement. Barring such an agreement, an

institution may fulfill this criterion by providing services that assist or relieve the government in

any of several ways.

The Enumerated Exemptions Of The General County Assessment Law

The Assessment Law describes 13 nonexclusive categories of property that are exempt from all

county and local taxes. On first glance, the category that might be most relevant is the one for

“institutions… of charity… with the grounds thereto annexed and necessary for the occupancy

and enjoyment of the same.” This is the provision that most broadly exempts the real estate of

purely public charities. All of the relevant categories of exemption are subject to three key

limitations.

36

Exempt Property

The property is exempt only if it is “actually and regularly used and occupied” for charitable

purposes. This requirement tends to become a problem in two circumstances. First is when a

portion of the property is used for a purpose that is not in itself charitable, and the taxing

authority chooses to analyze that portion separately. This problem is discussed in some detail

below. Second is when a portion of the property is not used at all, but is held in anticipation of

specific future use or simply lies in reserve. Courts have applied inconsistent rules in such

instances. Some courts have said that it is entirely for the taxing authority to determine how

much reserve property is reasonably useful and convenient to the charity; others have said the

taxing authority cannot substitute its judgment in that regard for that of the charity’s board.

Courts may lean one way or another based on a variety of factors including whether the parcel

was acquired together with other lands clearly necessary to charitable uses, and whether a public

road divides the parcel from other lands of the charity.

Not Exempt

The property is not exempt if the institution derives any income from use of the property, unless

that income comes from persons or organizations that are themselves “recipients of the bounty of

the institution.” This means that any property producing rents, usage fees or other comparable

revenues is taxable unless two conditions are met. First, the net flow of value must be toward the

tenants. In a simple situation where there are no economic ties between landlord and tenant

other than rent, then the rent must be below market value. If the economic relationship is more

complex, then the institution may be able to introduce arguments that other promises or subsidies

are relevant. Second, any tenancy or other fee-producing use must advance or facilitate the

charitable purposes of the landlord institution, not just by the production of income, but also by

the nature of the activity carried out on the property. My experience is that this requirement

rarely draws the attention of objectors.

Not Exempt 2

The property is not exempt unless the institution using the property also owns legal or equitable

title to the property. A lease may convey a sufficient interest to sustain a claim for real estate tax

exemption.

Taxing Authorities’ Latitude To Conduct Separate Analysis Of Separate Operations

Assessment Law

Under the Assessment Law and its predecessors, taxing authorities have long been able to

subject portions of parcels to separate review as to whether those portions are actually and

regularly used and occupied for charitable purposes.

Act 55

Act 55 includes a provision that (in part) underscores the power of taxing authorities to make

such decision by stating that nothing in Act 55 shall be deemed to preclude a taxing authority

from making determinations as to whether a particular parcel, or portion of a parcel, is actually

used to advance the charitable purposes of an institution of purely public charity.

37

Burdens Of Proof

Owners

Generally, the burden of proving that property is exempt from taxation lies on the owner of the

property. This is true as to both major elements of the inquiry: the institution has the burden of

proving that it is a purely public charity, and also the burden of proving that the property is used

within an exemption enumerated under the Assessment Law. Items such as federal tax

determination letters may be presented as evidence, but are not in themselves determinative.

Sales and Use Tax

It is sometimes said that an institution that has been found to be exempt from Sales and Use Tax

is presumed to be a purely public charity, that is to say the burden of proof as to the first element

of exemption shifts to the taxing authority if the institution has a sales tax exemption letter.

There is a provision of Act 55 that can be read to have something like this effect for institutions

with annual program service revenues of less than $10 million. For larger institutions, however,

the provision only affects disputes between an institution and a political subdivision with which

that institution has a valid PILOT or SILOT agreement. As a practical matter, a municipality

will have already terminated or contested an agreement concerning property it is now trying to

tax, so this provision may be of little use except in the case of newly acquired property.

October 18, 2008


38

Mackey’s Landmarks

Note: The Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania does not record any special list of landmarks. It appears that at more than a majority of U.S. Grand Lodges have not adopted any specific

landmarks.

1. The modes of RECOGNITION.

2. THE DIVISION OF SYMBOLIC MASONRY INTO THREE DEGREES.

3. The Legend of the THIRD DEGREE.

4. THE GOVERNMENT OF THE FRATERNITY BY A PRESIDING OFFICER called a

Grand Master.

5. The prerogative of the Grand Master to preside over every assembly of the craft.

6. The prerogative of the Grand Master to grant Dispensations for conferring degrees at

irregular times.

7. The prerogative of the Grand Master to give dispensations for opening and holding

Lodges.

8. The prerogative of the Grand Master to make masons at sight.

9. The necessity of masons to congregate in lodges.

10. The government of the craft, when so congregated in a Lodge by a Master and two

Wardens.

11. The necessity that every lodge, when congregated, should be duly tiled.

12. The right of every mason to be represented in all general meetings of the craft and to

instruct his representatives.

13. The Right of every mason to appeal from the decision of his brethren in Lodge convened,

to the Grand Lodge or General Assembly of Masons.

14. THE RIGHT OF EVERY MASON TO VISIT and sit in every regular Lodge.

15. No visitor, unknown as a Mason, can enter a Lodge without first passing an examination

according to ancient usage

16. No Lodge can interfere in the business of another Lodge, nor give degrees to brethren

who are members of other Lodges

17. Every freemason is Amenable to the Laws and Regulations of the masonic jurisdiction in

which he resides.

18. Qualifications of a candidate: that he shall be a man, unmultilated, free born, and of

mature age.

19. A belief in the existence of God.

20. Subsidiary to this belief in God, is the belief in a resurrection to a future life.

21. A "Book of the Law" shall constitute an indispensable part of the furniture of every

Lodge.

22. THE EQUALITY OF ALL MASONS.

23. The secrecy of the institution.

24. The foundation of a Speculative Science, for purposes of religious or moral teaching.

25. These Landmarks can never be changed.

39

FIRST The modes of RECOGNITION are, of all the Landmarks, the most legitimate and

unquestioned. They admit of no variation; and if ever they have suffered alteration or

addition, the evil of such a violation of the ancient law has always made itself subsequently

manifest. [An admission of this is to be found in the proceedings of the Masonic Congress at

Paris, where a proposition was presented to render these modes of recognition once more

universal - a proposition which never would have been necessary, if the integrity of this

important Landmark had been rigorously preserved.]

SECOND

THE DIVISION OF SYMBOLIC MASONRY INTO THREE DEGREES is a Landmark that has been

better preserved than almost any other, although even here the mischievous spirit of

innovation has left its traces, and by the disruption of its concluding portion from the Third

Degree, a want of uniformity has been created in respect to the final teaching of the

Master’s order, and the Royal Arch of England, Scotland, Ireland, and America, and the

"high degrees" of France and Germany, are all made to differ in the mode in which they lead

the neophyte to the great consummation of all symbolic masonry. In 1813, the Grand Lodge

of England vindicated the ancient Landmark, by solemnly enacting that ancient craft

Masonry consisted of the three degrees: Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft, and Master

Mason, including the Holy Royal Arch; but the disruption has never been healed, and the Landmark, although acknowledged in its integrity by all, still continues to be violated.

THIRD

The Legend of the THIRD DEGREE is an important Landmark, the integrity of which has

been well preserved. There is no rite of Masonry, practiced in any country or language, in

which the essential elements of this legend are not taught. The lectures may vary, and

indeed are constantly changing, but the legend has ever remained substantially the same;

and it is necessary that it should be so, for the legend of the Temple Builder constitutes the

very essence and identity of Masonry; any rite which should exclude it, or materially alter it,

would at once, by that exclusion or alteration, cease to be a Masonic rite.

FOURTH

THE GOVERNMENT OF THE FRATERNITY BY A PRESIDING OFFICER called a Grand Master,

who is elected from the body of the craft, is a Fourth Landmark of the Order. Many persons

[ignorantly] suppose that the election of the Grand Master is held in consequence of a law

or regulation of the Grand Lodge. Such, however, is not the case. The office is indebted for

its existence to a Landmark of the Order. Grand Masters |, or persons performing the

functions under a different but equivalent title,| are to be found in the records of the

institution long before Grand Lodges were established; and if the present system of

legislative government by Grand Lodges were to be abolished, a Grand Master would be

necessary. [In fact, although there has been a period within the records of history, and

indeed of very recent date, when a Grand Lodge was unknown, there never has been a time

when the craft did not have their Grand Master.]

40

FIFTH

The prerogative of the Grand Master to preside over every assembly of the craft,

wheresoever and whensoever held, is a fifth Landmark. It is in consequence of this law,

derived from ancient usage, and not from any special enactment, that the Grand Master

assumes the chair, or as it is called in England, "the throne," at every communication of the

Grand Lodge; and that he is also entitled to preside at the communication of every

Subordinate Lodge, where he may happen to be present.

SIXTH

The prerogative of the Grand Master to grant Dispensations for conferring degrees at

irregular times, is another and a very important Landmark. The statutory law of Masonry

requires a month, or other determinate period, to elapse between the presentation of a

petition and the election of a candidate. But the Grand Master has the power to set aside or

dispense with this probation, and allow a candidate to be initiated at once. This prerogative

he possessed [in common with all Masters,] before the enactment of the law requiring a

probation, and as no statute can impair his prerogative, he still retains the power[, although

the Masters of Lodges no longer possess it].

SEVENTH

The prerogative of the Grand Master to give dispensations for opening and holding Lodges is

another Landmark. He may grant, in virtue of this, to a sufficient number of Masons, the

privilege of meeting together and conferring degrees. The Lodges thus established are

called "Lodges under Dispensation." [They are strictly creatures of the Grand Master,

created by his authority, existing only during his will and pleasure, and liable at any

moment to be dissolved at his command. They may he continued for a day, a month, or six

months; but whatever be the period of their existence, they are indebted for that existence

solely to the grace of the Grand Master.]

EIGHTH

The prerogative of the Grand Master to make masons, is a Landmark which is closely

connected with the preceding one. There has been much misapprehension in relation to this

Landmark, which misapprehension has sometimes led to a denial of its existence in

jurisdictions where the Grand Master was perhaps at the very time substantially exercising

the prerogative, without the slightest remark or opposition. [It is not to be supposed that

the Grand Master can retire with a profane into a private room, and there, without

assistance, confer the degrees of Freemasonry upon him. No such prerogative exists, and

yet many believe that this is the so much talked of right of "making Masons at sight". The

real mode and the only mode of exercising the prerogative is this: The Grand Master

summons to his assistance not less than six other masons, convenes a Lodge, and without

any previous probation, but in sight of the candidate, confers the degrees upon him, after

which he dissolves the Lodge and dismisses the brethren. Lodges thus convened for special

purposes are called occasional lodges. This is the only way in which any Grand Master within

the records of the institution has ever been known to "make a Mason at sight". The

prerogative is dependent upon that of granting dispensations to open and hold Lodges. If

the Grand Master has the power of granting to any other Mason the privilege of presiding

over Lodges working by his dispensation, he may assume this privilege of presiding to

41

himself; and as no one can deny his right to revoke his dispensation granted to a number of

brethren at a distance, and to dissolve the Lodge at his pleasure, it will scarcely be

contended that he may not revoke his dispensation for a Lodge over which he himself has

been presiding, within a day, and dissolve the Lodge as soon as the business for which he

had assembled it is accomplished. The making of Masons at sight is only the conferring of

the degrees by the Grand Master, at once, in an occasional Lodge, constituted by his

dispensing power for the purpose, and over which he presides in person.]

NINTH

The necessity [of] |for| masons to congregate in lodges is another Landmark. It is not to be

understood by this that any ancient Landmark has directed that permanent organization of

subordinate Lodges which constitutes one of the features of the Masonic system as it now

prevails, but the landmarks of the Order always prescribed that Masons should from time to

time congregate together, for the purpose of either operative or speculative labor, and that

these congregations should be called Lodges. Formerly these were extemporary meetings

called together for special purposes, and then dissolved, the brethren departing to meet

again at other times and other places, according to the necessity of circumstances. But

warrants of constitution, by-laws, permanent officers and annual arrears, are modern

innovations wholly outside [of] the Landmarks, and dependent entirely on the special

enactments of a comparatively recent period.

TENTH

The government of the craft, when so congregated in a Lodge by a Master and two

Wardens, is also a Landmark. [To show the influence of this ancient law, it may be observed

by the way, that] a congregation of Masons meeting together under any other government,

as that for instance of a president and vice-president, or a chairman and subchairman,

would not be recognized as a Lodge, The presence of a Master and two Wardens is as

essential to the valid organization of a Lodge as a warrant of constitution is at the present

day. The names, of course, vary in different languages, [the Master, for instance, being

called "Venerable" in French Masonry, and the Wardens "Surveillants,"] but the officers, their number, prerogatives and duties, are everywhere identical.

ELEVENTH

The necessity that every lodge, when congregated, should be duly tiled, is an important

Landmark of the institution, which is never neglected. The necessity of this law arises from

the esoteric character of Masonry. [As a secret institution, its portals must of course be

guarded from the intrusion of the profane, and such a law must therefore always have been

in force from the very beginning of the Order. It is therefore properly classed among the

most ancient Landmarks. The office of Tiler is wholly independent of any special enactment

of Grand or Subordinate Lodges, although these may and do prescribe for him additional

duties, which vary in different jurisdictions. But] the duty of guarding the door, and keeping

off cowans and eavesdroppers, is an ancient one, which constitutes a Landmark [for the government].

42

TWELFTH

The right of every mason to be represented in all general meetings of the craft and to

instruct his representatives, is a twelfth Landmark. Formerly, these general meetings, which

were usually held once a year, were called "General Assemblies," and all the fraternity, even

to the youngest Entered Apprentice, were permitted to be present. Now they are called

"Grand Lodges," and only the Masters and Wardens of the Subordinate Lodges are

summoned. But this is simply as the representatives of their members. Originally, each

Mason represented himself; now he is represented by his officers. [This was a concession

granted by the fraternity about 1717, and of course does not affect the integrity of the

Landmark, for the principle of representation is still preserved. The concession was only

made for purposes of convenience.]

THIRTEEN

The Right of every mason to appeal from the decision of his brethren in Lodge convened, to

the Grand Lodge or General Assembly of Masons, is a Landmark highly essential to the

preservation of justice, and the prevention of oppression. A few modern Grand Lodges, in

adopting a regulation that the decision of Subordinate Lodges, in cases of expulsion, cannot

be wholly set aside upon an appeal, have violated this unquestioned Landmark, as well as the principles of just government

FOURTEENTH

THE RIGHT OF EVERY MASON TO VISIT and sit in every regular Lodge is an unquestionable

Landmark of the Order." This is called "the right of visitation." This right of visitation has

always been recognized as an inherent right, which inures to every Mason as he travels

through the world. And this is because Lodges are justly considered as only divisions for

convenience of the universal Masonic family. This right may, of course be impaired or

forfeited on special occasions by various circumstances; but when admission is refused to a

Mason in good standing, who knocks at the door of a Lodge as a visitor, it is to be expected

that some good and sufficient reason shall be furnished for this violation, of what is in general a Masonic right, founded on the Landmarks of the Order.

FIFTEENTH

It is a Landmark of the Order, that no visitor, unknown to the brethren present, or to some

one of them as a Mason, can enter a Lodge without first passing an examination according

to ancient usage. Of course, if the visitor is known to any brother present to be a Mason in

good standing, and if that brother will vouch for his qualifications, the examination may be

dispensed with, as the Landmark refers only to the cases of strangers, who are not to be recognized unless after strict trial, due examination, or lawful information.

SIXTEENTH

No Lodge can interfere in the business of another Lodge, nor give degrees to brethren who

are members of other Lodges, This is undoubtedly an ancient Landmark, founded on the

great principles of courtesy and fraternal kindness, which are at the very foundation of our

43

institution. It has been repeatedly recognized by subsequent statutory enactments of all Grand Lodges.

SEVENTEENTH

It is a Landmark that every freemason is Amenable to the Laws and Regulations of the

masonic jurisdiction in which he resides, and this although he may not be a member of any

Lodge. Non-affiliation, which is, in fact in itself a Masonic offense, does not exempt a Mason from Masonic Jurisdiction.

EIGHTEENTH

Certain qualifications of candidates for initiation are derived from a Landmark of the Order.

These qualifications are that he shall be a man, shall be unmultilated, free born, and of

mature age. That is to say, a woman, a cripple, or a slave, or one born in slavery, is

disqualified for initiation into the rites of Masonry. Statutes, it is true, have from time to

time been enacted, enforcing or explaining these principles; but the qualifications really

arise from the very nature of the Masonic institution, and from its symbolic teachings, and have always existed as landmarks.

NINETEENTH

A belief in the existence of God as the GRAND ARCHITECT of the universe, is one of the

most important Landmarks of the Order. It has been always deemed essential that a denial

of the existence of a Supreme and Superintending Power, is an absolute disqualification for

initiation. The annals of the Order never yet have furnished or could furnish an instance in

which an avowed atheist was ever made a Mason. The very Initiatory ceremonies of the first degree forbid and prevent the possibility of so monstrous an occurrence.

TWENTIETH

Subsidiary to this belief in God, as a Landmark of the Order, is the belief in a resurrection to

a future life. This Landmark is not so positively impressed on the candidate by exact words

as the preceding; but the doctrine is taught by very plain implication, and runs through the

whole symbolism of the Order. To believe in Masonry, and not to believe in a resurrection,

would be an absurd anomaly, which could only be excused by the reflection, that he who

thus confounded his belief and his skepticism, was so ignorant of the meaning of both theories as to have no rational foundation for his knowledge of either.

TWENTY-FIRST

It is a Landmark, that a "Book of the Law" shall constitute an indispensable part of the

furniture of every Lodge. I say advisedly, a Book of the Law, because it is not absolutely

required that everywhere the Old and New Testaments shall be used. The "Book of the Law"

is that volume which, by the religion of the country, is believed to contain the revealed will

of the Grand Architect of the universe. Hence, in all Lodges in Christian countries, the Book

of the Law is composed of the Old and New Testaments; in a country where Judaism was

the prevailing faith, the Old Testament alone would be sufficient; and in Mohammedan

countries, and among Mohammedan Masons the Koran might be substituted. Masonry does

44

not attempt to interfere with the peculiar religious faith of its disciples, except so far as

relates to the belief in the existence of God, and what necessarily results from that belief.

The |"|Book of the Law|"| is to the speculative Mason his spiritual Trestle-board; without

this he cannot labor; whatever he believes to be the revealed will of the Grand Architect

constitutes for him this spiritual Trestle|-|board, and must ever be before him in his hours

of speculative labor, to be the rule and guide of his conduct The Landmark, therefore,

requires that a |"|Book of the Law,|"| a religious code of some kind, purporting to be an

exemplar of the revealed will of God, shall form in essential part of the furniture of every Lodge.

TWENTY-SECOND

THE EQUALITY OF ALL MASONS is another Landmark of the Order. This equality has no

reference to any subversion of those gradations of rank which have been instituted by the

usages of society. The monarch, the nobleman or the gentleman is entitled to all the

influence, and receives all the respect which rightly belong to his exalted position. But the

doctrine of Masonic equality implies that, as children of one great Father, we meet in the

Lodge upon the level-that on that level we are all traveling to one predestined goal, that in

the Lodge genuine merit shall receive more respect than boundless wealth, and that virtue

and knowledge alone should be the basis of all Masonic honors, and be rewarded with

preferment. When the labors of the Lodge are over, and the brethren have retired from

their peaceful retreat, to mingle once more with the world, each will then again resume that

social position, and exercise the privileges of that rank, to which the customs of society entitle him.

TWENTY-THIRD

The secrecy of the institution is another and a most important Landmark. [There is some

difficulty in precisely defining what is meant by a "secret society," If the term refers, as

perhaps in strictly logical language it should, to those associations whose designs are

concealed from the public eye, and whose members are unknowing which produce their

results in darkness, and whose operations are carefully hidden from the public gaze - a

definition which will be appropriate to many political clubs and revolutionary combinations in

despotic countries, where reform, if it is at all to be effected, must be effected by stealth -

then clearly Freemasonry is not a secret society. Its design is not only publicly proclaimed.

but is vaunted by its disciples as something to be venerated; its disciples are known, for its

membership is considered an honor to be coveted; it works for a result of which it boasts,

the civilization, and reformation of his manners. But if by a Secret society is meant, and this

is the most popular understanding of the term, a society in which there is a certain amount

of knowledge, whether it be of methods of recognition, or of legendary and traditional

learning, which is imported to those only who have passed through an established form of

initiation, the form itself being also concealed or esoteric, then in this sense is Freemasonry

undoubtedly a secret society. Now this form of secrecy is a form inherent in it, existing with

It from its very foundation, and secured to it by its ancient Landmarks.] |The form of

secrecy is a form inherent in it, existing with it from its very foundation, and secured to it

by its ancient landmarks.| If divested of its secret character, it would lose its identity, and

would cease to be Freemasonry. Whatever objections may, therefore, be made to the

institution, on account of its secrecy, and however much some unskil[l]ful brethren have

been willing in times of trial, for the sake of expediency, to divest it of its secret character,

it will be ever impossible to do so, even were the Landmark not standing before us as an

insurmountable obstacle; because such change of its character would be social suicide, and

the death of the Order would follow its legalized exposure. Freemasonry, as a secret

45

association, has lived unchanged for centuries[; as] an open society it would not last for as many years.

TWENTY-FOURTH

The foundation of a Speculative Science upon an Operative Art, and the symbolic use and

explanation of the terms of that art, for purposes of religious or moral teaching, constitute

another Landmark of the Order. The Temple of Solomon was the [symbolic] cradle of the

institution, and, therefore, the reference to the operative Masonry, which constructed that

magnificent edifice, to the materials and implements which were employed in its

construction, and to the artists who were engaged in the building, are all component and

essential parts of the body of Freemasonry, which could not be subtracted from it without

an entire destruction of the whole identity of the Order. Hence, all the comparatively

modern rites of Masonry, however they may differ in other respects, religiously preserve

this temple history and these operative elements, as the substratum of all their modifications of the Masonic system.

TWENTY-FIFTH

The last and crowning Landmark of all is, that these Landmarks can never be changed.

Nothing can be subtracted from them-nothing can be added to them-not the slightest

modification can be made in them. As they were received from our predecessors, we are

bound by the most solemn obligations of duty to transmit them to our successors. Not one

jot or one tittle of these unwritten laws can be repealed; for in respect to them, we are not

only willing but compelled to adopt the language of the sturdy old barons of England - "Nolumus leges mutari."

Square brackets denote sections omitted in Mackey’s

Vertical bars denote text added. Punctuation and capitalization varies.

These Landmarks, compiled by Albert G. Mackey, first appeared in the October 1858 edition

of American Quarterly Review of Freemasonry, (vol. ii., p. 230.) and were incorporated into

his A Text Book of Masonic Jurisprudence. [Robt Macoy, New York: 1859].

Retrieved from http://www.freemasonry.bcy.ca/grandlodge/landmarks.html on October 13,

2008.

Documents

MASONIC LAW 2008ephratalodge665.org/Masonic Law/Grand Lodge System.pdf · 2015. 4. 30. · Masonic Villages..... 13 Unincorporated unit of the Grand Lodge ... Older law provides that