Basic HTML Version
INBRIEF
~
...THINGS THATARE
GOD~S"
by
Stanley
R.
Rader
1
n the course of being inter–
viewed on various radio and
TV talk shows, 1 have noticed
that sorne people-usually
sorne se lf- styled ' 'v ill age
atheist"-cannot think straight
about religious freedom because
they are obsessed with the fact
that churches are granted proper–
ty tax exemption. Another Span–
ish lnquisition could be going full
blast- but all they would care
about is whether churches paid
property taxes.
Somehow many have got it into
thei r minds that because church–
es enjoy tax-exempt status, the
state has granted them sorne spe–
cial privilege. From sorne people's
point of view, the cost of this
"privilege" ought to be regulation
and control by the state.
Other people have a slightly
different, but equally erroneous
idea in their heads. C hurches
enjoy tax exemption, they say,
because they do good works and
relieve the government of sorne of
its welfare burden. Of course, the
idea boomerangs: if the govern–
ment ceases to think that church–
es serve its purposes, or if a
church has a different idea of how
it should spend its money than
merely duplicating the. local wel–
fare office, then no tax exemption
could be granted.
So it should come as a surprise to
them to find out that church prop–
er ty-tax exemption is not sorne
handout from an overly generous
Legislature, but is something which
flows from the very Constitution of
the United States.
Unlike freedom of the press, or
assembly or speech, religious
freedom is protected
twice
in the
First Amendment of the Consti–
tution. One part of the First
Amendment forbids the govern–
ment to interfere with your "free
January 1981
exercise" of your religion, anoth–
er part forbids the government to
"establish" its own religion.
There's nothing that says the
government can't "establish" its
own
press-witness
all the offi–
cial government publications-or
its own right of free speech–
government officials speak out all
the time- but
religion
is special.
lt
is, as 1 heard Dean Kelley of
the National Council of Churches
say once (we were guests on the
same talk show), "unique and
~~
The point of the
Supreme Court's ruling
is that
if
the choice is
between taxing church
property or not taxing it,
the most 'neutral' course
is not to tax. Any other
result .
..
would
'entangle' government in
church affairs.
' '
different from everything else
that government appl ies."
Sorne people think a church's
tax exemption is just the same as
a government subsidy. One Su–
preme Court justice, fortunately
in the minority, just carne out and
said it once, "A tax exemption is
a subsidy." The mentality behind
that idea is a little frightening–
by the same reasoning, everything
that is
not taxed
is like being on
the governme.nt payroll!
Foriunately, about a decade
ago, the Supreme Court consid-
ered this argument and rejected
it. A property owner in New
York sued to force the New York
City Tax Commission to tax
church property. He said that not
taxing was like granting a subsi–
dy. It was as if the city were
funding churches out of tax dol–
lars, which, of course, would vio–
late the separation of church and
state.
But the Supreme Court said
that it would violate the separa–
tion of church and state
not
to
grant churches tax exemption!
The Court said:
"Eliminati on of exemption
would tend to expand the involve–
ment of government by giving
rise to tax valuation of church
property, tax liens, tax foreclo–
sures, and the direct confronta–
tions and conflicts that follow in
the train of those legal pro–
cesses."
The point of the Supreme
Court's ruling is that if the choice
is between taxing church propet–
ty or not taxing it, the most
"neutral" course is not to tax.
Any other result would itself vio–
late the principie of separation of
church and state because it would
"entangle" government in church
affairs.
Now here is a suprise: the
Worldwide Church of God is the
second largest property-tax payer
in Pasadena, California! While we
have a constit utional right not to
be taxed, Herbert W. Armstrong
long ago set a policy that we
would not seek exemption from
all property taxes. We believe in
being good neighbors and haven't
tried to grasp every last bit of
advantage that is rightfully ours.
Nevertheless, an important
principle- at the core of preserv–
ing the liberty of God's Govern–
ment to operate freely within His
Church-is that just because our
property is tax exempt does not
mean we are owned by the state.
Churches are not, in one dissent–
ing justi ce's curmudgeonly
phrase, "feeding at the public
trough," because their property
cannot be taxed away from
them.
o
17