With religious affiliation on the decline, what should happen to hallowed buildings?

[trotsky]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/07/14/with-religious-affiliation-on-the-decline-what-should-happen-to-hallowed-buildings/

Katy Perry wants to live in a convent.

No, she is not among the young women who want to become a Catholic sister (and yes, they do exist). She has negotiated with the Los Angeles Archdiocese to buy a former convent in Los Feliz, one of the trendiest neighborhoods in L.A.

The real estate deal attracted national media attention recently because two nuns are blocking Perry’s purchase, saying they’ve already sold the property to another buyer.

But beyond the celebrity factor, this story highlights an important question about the future of religion: What should happen to hallowed buildings left empty not only by the decline in the number of nuns but also by the rise of religious “nones,” those who don’t identify with religion?

[SecularMotion]

1. First off, they should no longer qualify as tax-exempt.

Strapped towns tax Catholic properties

Nine cities and towns have forced the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Boston to pay property taxes on closed churches, schools, convents, and parish halls, contending that the buildings no longer qualify as tax-exempt because the archdiocese is not using them.

Two of the taxed churches — St. Frances X. Cabrini in Scituate and St. Jeremiah in Framingham — have been occupied for years by former parishioners protesting their closure. But local assessors insist the church buildings are now taxable because the vigils are not sanctioned by the archdiocese.

The archdiocese has fought back, arguing that its closed churches should remain exempt from taxation, but has had little success. In Belmont, Danvers, Lowell, Lynn, and Revere, the archdiocese has withdrawn appeals of tax bills for closed churches, reluctantly agreeing to pay reduced levies totaling about $280,000. This year, for example, it will pay the city of Lowell about $19,400 in property taxes on Sacred Heart Church, which was closed in 2003.

Hundreds of thousands of dollars remain in dispute before the state Appellate Tax Board, where the archdiocese hopes to fend off tax collectors in Framingham, Natick, and Scituate, and where it is also challenging Revere’s decision to tax a convent that still houses a small number of nuns.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/05/31/boston_area_communities_taxing_closed_catholic_properties/

[djean111]

2. I think converting churches and such into homes has been happening for a long time.

And Ann Rice, I believe, lives/lived in a convent in New Orleans that she converted into a home. (Interview with a Vampire.)

To me (atheist), a structure is only "hallowed" to the people who believe in it. Once they are gone, it is just a piece of real estate, unless it is of historical importance.
Also - when these buildings are sold, they will be, hopefully, now generating real estate taxes, so the local schools and infrastructure will benefit. All good, IMO.

[uriel1972]

7. I understood Anne Rice went full on fundie... I could be wrong... nt

[djean111]

9. Well, this is interesting - this is 2010 -

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2010/oct/24/anne-rice-catholic-church-rejection-vampire

......
And now, the Vatican. Earlier this year, Rice, who was raised a Catholic, lost her faith and returned to it in middle age, posted a message on Facebook. "I quit," she wrote. "In the name of Christ, I refuse to be anti-gay. I refuse to be anti-feminist. I refuse to be anti-artificial birth control. I refuse to be anti-Democrat. I refuse to be anti-secular humanism. I refuse to be anti-science. I refuse to be anti-life. In the name of Christ, I quit Christianity and being Christian. Amen."

.........

And just a couple of weeks ago she got into a dispute, for using the word "lynching" to describe online bullying of another author.
I am not going to go into that, because I am of several minds about that word.

[uriel1972]

12. Obviously I haven't been keeping up :)... nt

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

3. Homeless shelters and soup kitchens. nt

[ChazInAz]

4. I'm an actor.

Churches make great theaters.

[AtheistCrusader]

5. Som are being turned into skate parks and concert venues.

Much better use of square footage.

Some churches have excellent acoustics. Some are total crap. St. Mark's in Seattle has terrible acoustics. With the concrete walls, I can only picture recycling it into a fortification for repelling horseback invaders of some sort. Otherwise it's spectacularly useless.

[Humanist_Activist]

6. They should be converted into whatever is feasible given the neighborhoods they are in...

the structure of the building, and what its best at, etc.

One person mentioned turning them into theaters or concert halls. I know of at least one church in my city that was repurposed for just that, and it has excellent acoustic due to that.

Convents and seminary halls would probably make good apartments after a good remodeling. Other types of buildings could be converted into schools, libraries, shops, etc.

I will say, if they continue to be owned by the religious organizations that owned them before, but simply repurposed, then they should be taxed and regulated like any other business of their type.

[uriel1972]

8. I'm on board with the libraries idea, can't have enough libraries... nt

[d_legendary1]

10. That's a hell of an idea!

I wouldn't mind visiting one of those. Plus you don't have to build them in parks, like certain places have done.

[Igel]

11. People don't get the tax exempt thing.

If they use the buildings primarily for profit, they're automatically taxable as real estate.

Any profit that doesn't come from the result of the organization's primary goal, i.e., it's "profit," is taxable. You sell little Muhammed statues at a mosque, the income's taxable.


What will happen is that any such buildings that are abandoned and 'blight' will be taken over by virtue of eminent domain.

Any other buildings are likely to be sold, then it's entirely up to the new owners--not the "community"--as to what to do with them. Convert them, tear them down, whatever.


Upthread some jurisdictions are taxing them if they're not actively used for religious purposes. That surprises me; it means that the default for a religious organization is "for profit unless proven otherwise." It's shifted the default, silently and entirely for $.

[Lordquinton]

13. That's always been the default for religion

The religions exemption for religions should be eliminated, then can file as a non-profit like everyone else. Oh, and have their finances reviewed like everyone else too.

[Humanist_Activist]

14. I do wonder about that, went to a gym run by a church once, they had a full fledged store...

in the church that sold religious paraphernalia and books, the church itself was actually at one end of a strip mall, having come from a Catholic background, it was a rather alien experience. Just didn't feel like a church, if that makes sense.

I question whether the store's revenue is taxed or not, part of the problem is that churches are usually labeled as non-profits, but they are regulated differently, at least federally, in that they are not required to account for their income or expenses nearly as much or often as other non-profits are. Local and State tax regulations will, of course, vary. As far as we know, that church store could be making a lot of money, it could be then donated to charity, or used to help pay bills, etc. or it could be used to fund the pastor's new mansion, or is saved for other purposes. How are we supposed to know, the books are closed.