Download the podcast (25:44, 17.6MB)
Subscribe to podcast in iTunes | Podcast feed
In this podcast, I discuss a Weekend America (NPR) story on churches being investigated by the IRS. As nonprofit 501(c)(3) organizations, churches are able to receive tax-deductible contributions from donors, but they are not allowed to endorse candidates for political office. They can, however, speak to specific issues that are under discussion at election times, and this has created a somewhat gray area that has resulted in a number of investigations and revocations of churches’ tax-exempt status.
I connect this phenomenon to David E. Fitch’s The Great Giveaway, as well as James K. A. Smith’s Introducing Radical Orthodoxy, both of which I am currently reading.
Music used in this podcast:
- Chub Creek Music - “Cheese Grater”
- Beck’s “E-Pro,” on the Guero album (short enough to fall under fair use)
- U2’s “Yahweh,” from How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb (also short enough to not get me sued, hopefully)
By the way, both books are published by Baker, so their similar appearance is not coincidental. The fact that I started reading them at the same time, however, is a coincidence.
The whole 501(c)(3) government scam has always bothered me. I don’t think it’s any of the government’s business what gets said inside a church, unless there is probable cause to believe a crime is being plotted or committed. The whole idea of the government using tax policy to regulate what is said in a sermon exposes the fallacy of “separation of church and state” for what it really is.
Opie-
I think most people would agree, but then why are we so committed to tax-deductible contributions? When did that become the birthright of churches, to be protected at all costs?
In the First Amendment to the Constitution.
The power to tax is the power to control, which is why the tax codes are so complicated. Why do we not have a flat tax? Because the government does not want one - they don’t intend to treat taxes as simply a way to pay for the costs of government; they want to use the tax code to influence your behavior too. The more they’re allowed to tax churches, the more they’ll use that power the same way.
Opie-
At issue is not whether churches are taxed, but whether they can receive contributions for which people get a tax write-off. It’s much easier to have a nonprofit organization than a full-on 501(c)(3).
The restrictions only apply to churches with the latter status, I believe.
OK, it’s a distinction, but not one that changes the ultimate objective of chilling the freedom of speech from the pulpit.
But there is only a restriction of freedom of speech if the church actively chooses to become a 501(c)(3). Otherwise, they’re free to say whatever they want. My point is that we’ve assumed for far too long that making the sacrifice in freedom for the more desirable financial status is the only viable choice.