Morning journal and courier., 1880-12-23
Thursday Morning, Dec. 2s, 1880.
TAXATION OF CHURCH PROPERTY.

TAXATION OF CHURCH PROPERTY. Should church property be taxed is ques- ton which is attracting considerable atten- ton in this country and will attract more. An interesting and valuable contribution to the discussion of the matter has been made by Hon. J. 0. Covert and other speakers at a meeting recently held in Cleveland, Ohio, at which meeting the subject was handled with out gloves
 MT. Covert laid down the broad platform that all property, except that used by the public, should be taxed. He argued that de- nominational property in this country is ac- eumulating so rapidly that it may some day assume dangerous proportions. In other countries and times ecclesiastical accumula- tions have been confscated for the public good. Something infinitely worse than taxa tion may come from unjust exemptions. The State in it's relations to property should not know a church; the State is neither Protest ant, Roman Catholic, Hebrew, nor Confueian. For the State to maintain that one denomina- ion is sacred and should receive privileges from the government is bigotry, and the first step towards religious despotism. To admit that all denominations may be of divine origin and are all entitled to privileges, at the ex- pense of the secular orders, is a step towards anarchy and oppression, and direct invita- tion for one to assert it's divine title by crush ing out the others as soon as it has the power Each church would like to escape taxation, and by tacit compromise all are unwisely exempted. He epointed out that to each citi- zen his church is sacred and others are not, and continued If neither creed regards the others as divine, and if the great body of non- church people are not impressed with their sacredness, surely this supposed quality should not exempt them from taxation Bring them together and they clash and jar and wrangle in endless schisms, disagreeing upon all the vital principles of salvation, but meet ing in perfect harmony before the tax gath erer. He, like death, levels them all The only point upon which they are a unit is that they should not be taxed.''
 In answer to the argument for the exemp- tion of church property, that after people have generously contributed to benevolent institution they should not be taxed to SUD- port it, MT. Covert said If generous citi-
 
 then aid to pay taxes on it, their burden will be no greater than if they retained their property and paid taxes on it. But you tell me they don't enjoy it or possess it now. I answer you, they ought to enjoy it even more since it has been converted into sacred place of worship than when it was mere sec ular property-an unused surplus of their wealth. When they owned it it helped to de- fray the burden of taxation, making the tax easier for all to bear. Since it became a church it is withdrawn from the property upon which taxes are levied and it increases the burden upon all other property. Tax can acre of ground upon your principal thorough fare. To-day it is taxed. Tomorrow some generous citizen presents it to church. It is consecrated to religious uses and ceases to be taxed. It is plain that if the generous owner had not given that property for church purposes it would continue to be taxed. His benevolence and generosity took it from the tax duplicate. His benevolence augmented the taxes upon all other property his benev- o1ence increased the burden upon every other member of society. Now submit whether one citizen has 8 right to indulge his gener- osity at the expense of others.
 Another speaker called attention to the vast Aalue of the church property exempt from taxation, the Roman Catholic church alone having, at a low estimate, $25O, COG, ,0OO worth, and continued: ''This immense wealth is not necessary for religion. It is not re- quired to worship God. It is really in- consistent with the true spirit of religion the outgrowth of pure worldly tastes, the accompaniment of reign of elegance and fashion more in conformity to the splen- dor of naughty monarch than like the humble example set by the King of Kings who died on Calvary. The old preachers who hurled the pagan gods from their seats, who lighted the gloom of antiquity by the bright fires of their pure faith, had no grand churches. The poor monk of Wittenberg shook the Roman world to it's very founda- tions, and he had no splendid edifce. It is the indwelling spirit of the man, the Christ lighted soul, that needs no gorgeous edifce, and shines most brightly in the midst of pow erty. It is modern fashion, the modern love of elegance, that demands the massive archi- lecture, the frescoed dome, the futed col umns, the translucent panes, and all the pomp and pride and stately splendor that pain the eye of many Christian. They not neces- sary to divine worship. They belong to the imperial purple rather than the carpenters son. No one objects to this display of wealth if the church people desire it, but we do say that in taxing it we do not tax religion. The least of these objects of value anywhere out side of church would pay taxes"
 This is plain talk, but there is much truth in it. A great many people, even in Connec- ticut, are quietly thinking just what was so boldly spoken at Cleveland.