January 27, 1972
In the Matter of the Petition by
INTERRELIGIOUS FOUNDATION FOR
COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION INC
475 Riverside Drive
New York, New York 10027
Denial of Second-Class Mail
Privileges for "IFCO NEWS"
P.S. Docket No.1/10
APPEARANCES:
Frank Patton, Jr., Esq.
Ellis, Stringfellow, Patton & Leibovitz
51 East 42nd Street
New York, New York 10017
for Petitioner
Arthur S. Cahn, Esq.
Law Department
United States Postal Service
Washington, D.D. 20260
for Respondent
INITIAL DECISION OF HEARING EXAMINER
Statement of the Case
On March 29, 1971, Interreligious Foundation for Organization, Appellant herein, filed an application for second-class mailing privileges for the publication "IFCO NEWS". Appellant asserted that it was eligible for the permit under that portion of 39 U. S. Code 4355 which reads as follows:
"(a) Mailable periodical publications meeting the first three conditions of Section 4354(a) of this title are entitled to be entered and mailed as second class mail when they do not contain advertising other than that part of the publisher and if they are --
* * * * * * * *
(9) published by a church or church organization ***."
On June 28, 1971, the official in charge of the Office of Mail Classification of the Postal Service, the Respondent, denied Appellant's application. The grounds for the denial were that (1) Appellant is not a church organization within the meaning of the above-quoted provision of law and (2) the term "church or church organization" as used in the said provision of law "embraces churches on the organizational level of an individual congregation and organizational units of an individual congregation."
Appellant took a timely appeal from Respondent's denial and, by agreement of the parties and the consent of the Hearing Examiner, this matter was submitted for decision on the record in lieu of the holding of an oral evidentiary hearing.
The issue presented is whether Appellant is a "church or church organization" within the meaning of 39 U. S. Code 435(a)(9). Both parties have submitted proposed findings of fact, conclusions of law, and arguments accompanied by certain supporting documentary evidence.
History, Composition and Nature of Appellant
Appellant is incorporated under the laws of the State of New York as a privately-owned, non-profit organization. Its purposes are stated in the Certificate of Incorporation to be, in pertinent part:
"To implement common programs and strategy among religious groups for the development of community organizations among the poor and others, as a part of the urban mission, ministry and program of such religious groups; to conduct research and develop educational materials in connection with the building of such programs and strategy; to determine the areas of highest priority in the development of such community organization; to commission evaluations of projects of such community organizations; provided, however, that the Corporation shall be organized and operated exclusively for charitable, religious and educational purposes and shall neither have nor exercise any powers not in furtherance of such purposes. ***"
Original directors of Appellant represented the following principals: Department of Church Life and Mission, National Council of Churches; Office of Urban Affairs of the Catholic Bishop of Chicago; American Baptist Home Mission Societies; Church Strategy and Development Division, United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A.; Executive Council of the Episcopal Church; Department of Urban Church, United Church Board of Homeland Ministries; National Division, Board of Missions of the Methodist Church; and the American Jewish Committee.
The membership of Appellant consists of organizations that participated in its original establishment, members at large not belonging to participating organizations, and additional participating organizations. (See Exhibit B, Respondent's Brief)
The initial participating organizations were American Baptist Home Mission Society, American Jewish Committee, Board of National Missions, United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A., Board of Missions of the Methodist Church, Executive Council of the Episcopal Church, Foundation for Voluntary Services, General Board of Christian Social Concerns, Catholic Committee for Community Organization, National Catholic Conference for Interracial Injustice, and United Church Board for Homeland Ministries.
Appellant's bylaws provide that additional organizations may become "Participating Organizations" if they meet, among other conditions, the requirements of being "religious, charitable or educational organizations" and if they otherwise are "committed to the purpose of the Corporation."
Is Petitioner a Church or Church Organization
Within the Meaning of 39 U.S. Code 4355(a)(9)
As Respondent points out in argument, in earlier administrative cases certain definitions of the term "church" have been quoted from Webster's New International Dictionary, Unabridged, Second Edition (1953), as follows:
"A body of Christian believers holding the same creed, observing the same rites, and acknowledging the same ecclesiastical authority, regarded as either the only true representation, or as a separate branch of the church universal, and often confined to limits territorial or historical."
* * * * * * * *
'A formally organized body of Christian believers worshipping together."
* * * * * * * *
"Any body of worshippers ***." (in the Matter of Mission to Mexico ( P.O.D. Docket No. 2/129, Departmental Decision, April 10, 1964) and In the Matter of Berean Bible Society (P.O.D. Docket No. 2/250, Departmental Decision, February 21, 1968)).
The term " organization" has been defined to mean, among other things:
* * * * * * * *
"organic structure; purposive systematic arrangement ***."
* * * * * * * *
"That which is organized; an organism ***."
(Webster's New International Dictionary, Unabridged,
Second Edition (1957)).
Statements in exhibits submitted with an affidavit by Appellant's Vice-President in support of the petition herein, show that the national offices of several church denominations and faiths in the United States participated directly or indirectly in the formation and establishment of Appellant. The national headquarters of other churches or church groups have become affiliated with Appellant in the period since its incorporation. The reason for the support of Appellant's activities by the various groups is stated to be the increased efficiency and economy with which certain religious and eleemosynary functions of the different groups can be accomplished when their efforts are channeled through one outlet.
Respondent does not question the worth purposes of Appellant, but Respondent asserts that the governing statute encompasses only local churches and their organizations. In support of this position, Respondent attaches to its brief, and quotes, excerpts from a portion of the legislative history of the statute.
It is true that Congressman Wright indicated in his discussion of the legislation which later was enacted and codified as 39 U. S. Code 4355(a)(9) that the legislation had as its primary purpose the extension of second-class mail privileges to local churches and their organizations. However, in his statement, Congressman Wright gave clear indication of his understanding that national church groups were already eligible for, and were exercising, those privileges. There is nothing in the governing statute as it was enacted and as it now exists in 4355(a)(9) that would remove or restrict the mailing privileges theretofore enjoyed by national church bodies or their organizations.
The facts of this case, as revealed by the submissions of the parties, are persuasive that Appellant is an "organism" or a "purposive systematic arrangement", - an arm - of the leadership of various faiths in this county for the accomplishment of certain goals, such as urban missions, greater racial understanding and other religious and charitable objectives. The fact that Appellant is an operating adjunct of a number of churches does not in any way detract from its character as a church organism.
Upon the basis of the entire record, the Hearing Examiner makes the following finds of fact and conclusions of law:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Appellant is not a church.
2. Appellant is an organization formed and operated by churches and it is thereby a church organization.
3. Appellant issues a publication known as "IFCO NEWS".
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Appellant is not a "church" as that term is used in 39 U. S. Code 4355(a)(9).
2. Appellant is a "church organization" within the meaning of 39 U. S. Code 4355(a)(9).
3. Appellant is entitled to a second-class mail permit for the publication "IFCO NEWS".
Proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law submitted by the parties have been carefully considered. Such findings and conclusions are adopted to the extent herein indicated. Otherwise such proposed findings and conclusions are rejected because they are not supported by substantial evidence or because they are immaterial.
This matter should be remanded to Respondent for action consistent with this decision.
William A. Duvall
Chief Hearing Examiner