THE NO-PROFIT SOPHISTRY.

A weak attempt to justify church graft consists in the affirmation that

it is engaged in purely altruistic labors, and is not a profitmaking

institution. It is not engaged in any openly commercial undertaking.

Salvation is free, and all are welcome to its inestimable blessings. The

sophistry and lack of ingenuousness which make it possible to present

such an argument with a straight face can scarcely be characterized in

parliamentary language. It fairly reeks with self-evident fallacies.

First of all, if the church chooses to run its affairs on a non-profit

basis, that is strictly its own business, and does not concern the state

in any way. If it has no property, it escapes taxation as a matter of

course, like the individual who has nothing. But if it is able to own

property, it immediately incurs a specific obligation to the state,

which is totally independent of the use it makes of its property.

The man who retires from business, and lives on his income, is not

thenceforward exempted from all taxation, because he is no longer making

money. Nor does it serve as an excuse that he is making no profitable

investments, but is using up his bare capital, and is spending his time

and part of his means in philanthropic work. In spite of all this, he is

a member of society, and must meet his obligations as such, whenever

the tax collector comes around. The same is true of an organization. The

church takes up just as much space, receives as much social protection

and as much benefit from every civic improvement, whether it is making

money or not. The state does not forbid it to make money or to engage

in commercial enterprises; and its failure to do so is purely voluntary,

and is entirely irrelevant to the discharge of its pecuniary obligation

to organized society. Its privileges may be free; but what does that

mean to those who count them as worthless? It is a cheap evasion of

responsibility to offer in lieu of the specific payment of a debt, to

render the creditor some form of alleged service for which he has no

possible use, and which means nothing whatever to him. This remains

true, even if the unbeliever is under the spell of error, and ought to

appreciate the blessings of religious counsel. The dance may be one

of the most beautiful forms of art; but if Vernon Castle offered to

discharge a monetary obligation to a blind creditor by the execution of

the most wonderful Terpsichorean evolutions in his presence, there would

be no payment of the debt, even though the artistic performance might be

intrinsically worth far more than the sum owed, and would be readily so

appraised by all who had their eyes. No matter how valuable religious

exercises may be in themselves, nor how much satisfaction they may give

those who believe in them, the civil rights of the unbeliever remain on

a par with those of the believer; and it remains true that the offer

by the church of un-desired services can in no way constitute an

obligation. Let the church be supported by those who accept its offer,

and who desire to profit by its privileges, such as they are. This

remains no affair of other persons, or of the state. The benefits of

religion are subjective and strictly personal; and the state is in no

way qualified to pass on their value. To say that non-churchmen should

help pay the expenses of the church because they can become churchmen

if they wish to do so, is to say that a debt can be contracted without a

consideration.

* Not that the church always regards the payment of its

private debt as "a matter of course." The Rev. Dr.

Huntington of Grace Episcopal Church, New York city, and

William R. Stewart, one of the church wardens, in 1908 asked

an architect, J. Stewart Barney by name, to prepare plans

for extensive and expensive alterations in the church

building. The architect did the work in good faith and to

the full satisfaction of the church, but was deliberately

cheated out of his pay on the pretext that, though the

church wanted the work done, knew and approved of its being

done, received and was fully pleased with the benefits of

it, yet it had not technically authorized its pastor and

warden to give the order! Grace church is one of the

wealthiest religious bodies in New York. Such is Christian

honor and morality, the exalted character of which is

supposed to lay the community under a burden of gratitude

toward the church!

Exempting the Churches An Argument for the Abolition of This Unjust and Unconstitutional Practice · 第 20 / 56 题