In case you weren’t already aware, the New York Times has been running a series on the exemptions from taxation and regulation being granted to religious organizations in the country today. Today’s installment, on tax breaks, is available here.
The series of articles has been rather thought-provoking, touching upon questions such as:
- the appropriateness of granting property tax breaks to a church-run retirement community / country club;
- the fairness of granting religious organizations exemptions from certain otherwise mandatory protections granted to employees; and
- the wisdom of granting church-run day care centers exemptions from state licensing requirements.
I feel like I should wax eloquently on the subject…but to be honest, I’m still mulling it over. It’s a challenging concept.
On the one hand, even though I may disagree with the doctrines endorsed, I can see that in general, religious organizations provide a benefit to society and therefore should be worthy of not being unnecessarily burdened with taxes. Providing assistance to the needy, providing comfort and a form of counseling to members, and fostering community spirit are all generally commendable activities that probably should be supported, or at least not hindered.
On the other hand, isn’t there a point where some religious entities pass beyond the scope of charity service to the public and parishoners, and grow into entities seeking to protect their own financial interests and to compete with entities encumbered by regulation and taxation?
Growing up in Memphis, I was familiar with the construction and relocation of Bellevue Baptist church. It outgrew its (large, but somewhat dated) campus in the heart of the city, and moved into a multi-million dollar glittering campus on the east side of the city.
To this day, I cannot understand why that move made sense in light of the Church’s mission. Wouldn’t it have made more sense to spawn a new church if the existing one couldn’t serve its members. Was it really necessary to spend that much money for the new campus; wouldn’t it have been more Christian to work to aid the hundreds of homeless and needy folks in the metro area?
How much of that move was about improving that church’s ability to carry out the mission it saw for itself — to spread God’s Word…and how much of it was to provide a way for the congregation to avoid having to sully themselves with the troubles of the community around it?
While there are many religious organizations I can respect…there are also quite a few that reek of being essentially for-profit businesses in the guise of religious entities.
It seems to me that there is a line somewhere dividing religion-as-charitable-organization from religion-as-business. Tax waivers and exemptions from some regulations should exist only on one side of that line, not both.
The challenge, of course, is in trying to reach some consensus on an appropriate definition of that line.