Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1915-06-13
STElZLE DISCUSSES
TAXATION OF CHURCHES
Point Of General Interest Now Being
Debated by New York Consti-
tutiOnnI Convention

A"e amendment regarding the tax
Ing Of churches now before the Con-
sututional Convention of New York
State should be considered in the light
of what churches actually render IN
iieu OF the taxes paid by everybody
else for the maintenance Of the state
writes Charles Stelzle in the New York
Times
Whether or not the particular amend
ment under consideration is alto
gether satisfactory. the entire question
OF church taxation should be taken out
OF the realm of mere sentiment and
discussed in the broadest manner pos
siole. and In view of the fact that the
citizens Of the State constitute every
variety Of opinion regarding religious
matters 1t may be difficult to reduce
TO mathematical terms the service
which church renders to society. but
II is not beyond human possibilities to
establish certain fundamental prin-
ciples in this regard. When for ex-
ample. church society owns property
made valuable by what the city as a
whole has done in the payment of taxes
or in the exercise of the functions of
It's citizens, and when that church So
ciety uses it's property selfshly for the
purpose OF "edifying" mere handful
OF people who are pew owners. but who
have no interest whatever in the phys-
ical and social well-being of the COM
munity in which the church property
is located, II is question as to whether
such society is giving the State an
equivalent for its RENTED taxes
And worse still, when the property
of the church was paid for originally
BY persons who have long since died
or moved away, how can those who
have recently come into the church
claim the right to use the property for
han
II was given primarily for the purpose
of building up the community life?
Or. again. what right has a mere
remnant to sell this property and use
the proceeds for the purpose of erect
ing another church several miles away
WITHOUT any attempt to pay back TO
the State, in part at least. the "un-
earned increment" of the old piece of
property, for which in most cases the
newer members never paid dollar, ex-
cepting perhaps. to keep the old church
in repairs? But really il is the ground
that is valuable. not the building; and
the ground was made valua bic. not so
much by what the church has done but
because OF what every man and woman
and child in the city has accomplished
We seem TO forget that the commun-
ity has a stake in the church which
never paid taxes, and scarcely made an
attempt 10 benefit the people of the
neighborhood in a practical way 1t
must not be forgotten that even an
ordinary religious society has n dis
tinct value in raising the moral tone
of Its city. and for this it should be
given credit, because such influences
always increase the financial value of
property in any community. But every
student OF ecclesiastical tendencies. es-
pecially in our big cities is confronted
by the fact that comparatively few Of
the churches are functioning in the
field Of social service to the extent
which would justify the State in ex-
empttne the enormous amount Of taxes
which would otherwise be paid for the
maintenance OF the State, and from
which all of its citizens would receive
direct benefit. Witness. for eXamplc
the removal of scores of churches from
the downtown sections OF New York
City. In spit" OF the almost appalling
congestion of population. and the CON
seouent need of social service. Appar-
emily, when social problems become
thickest the churches become thinnest
1t Is very generally conceded that
the church and the State must he kept
separate. but If the church insists upon
exemption from taxation, then it DELHI
erately places itself in n position where
the State must become the Judge as to
whether or not II is entitled to cxemp-
ton. 1t naturally follows. therefore,
that the work of tho church is not n
private affair in which the State has
no right to interfere. This has nothing
to do with forms of worship or relig-
ious beliefs. Every citizen in this
country has an inalienable right to
practice religion as he thinks best in
so far as he does not interfere with the
rights Of others. But when any group
of persons asks for exemption from
taxes which must be made up by others.
has not the state the right to set up
n standard of requirements in the field
OF social service which every church
asking for exemption OF taxes must
meet?
Such law would not work hard
ship upon weaker churches situated in
poorer communities. for in all proba
bility these churches. if they are sup
ported by working people. would natur-
ally engage In some form OF social
work The churches which are support
ed by the wealthy, and which do not
engage in social service. could we'll af-
ford to pay the taxes demanded by the
State.
THE LITTLE BLACK SHEEP.