I'm just going to say this.
Any pastor who gives an actively campaigning political candidate access to his/her pulpit during a worship service has utterly failed their responsibilities to their congregation. A worship service is not the place for a political campaign event.
At a very minimum every church that does this should immediately lose their tax exempt status.
5 comments:
I disagree. While we both can regard that practice as inappropriate for a worship service (I say that as a bit more than a general rule), the response shouldn't be an attack on their tax exempt status. It should be something the congregation decides to address in house. It's none of the government's (the IRS's) business how worship services are run. It's not a (*gack!*) church/state issue, as there's no directive from either to avoid such a thing, and there's none from Scripture which does either, except where a candidate supports an agenda which is anathema to the faith.
But I would insist that far more preferable would be to save such a speech for after the conclusion of the service, where those interested or not can decide whether or not to stick around and listen. That is, worship first, campaign after. Frankly, I think the sermon should come after worship as well.
One of the contingencies of tax exempt status for churches is that they abstain from certain political activities. Having a campaign rally masquerading as a worship service qualifies. If a church chooses to engage in these stunts, then they should show the courage to give up their tax exempt status and go all in. It's a cowards way of acting.
From a purely church perspective, to defile a worship service with a political/campaign event is hugely problematic. If a church I attended did this, no matter for who, I'd be gone immediately.
I addressed the tax exempt issue.
It's exactly what Jefferson was referring to in his church/state letter, to keep the state out of the church.
Obviously Harris' agenda is anathema to the faith, and Jesus did say something about rendering to Caesar, so...
Again if churches want to host partisan political events, they can. As long as the give up their tax exemption.
The only exception I could possibly see is if the church made space available to any and every candidate for events that are completely separate from a worship service.
A worship service is a specific event intended for one purpose, to dilute that purpose (more than it's already diluted in many instances) with partisan politics is simply wrong.
One thought on the tax exempt thing. It's a status that is offered to certain groups which comes with certain limits. If one forms a group and takes advantage of tax exempt status, the one agrees to abide by the limits of that status. Seems like churches, of all groups, wouldn't want to engage in that kind of behavior.
"One of the contingencies of tax exempt status for churches is that they abstain from certain political activities. Having a campaign rally masquerading as a worship service qualifies. If a church chooses to engage in these stunts, then they should show the courage to give up their tax exempt status and go all in. It's a cowards way of acting."
Not at all. If you ramp up your political speech and were taxed as a result, you would not wish to be assaulted in that manner. The church (I use the term here in a general way for convenience), being exempt is not wrong for speaking out politically. It has not interfered with government any more than those who are taxed. Not all who are taxed involve themselves politically, and not who are taxed refrain from speaking out more than others. But neither are taxed on the basis of their degree of exercise of their 1st Amendment right to speak. Yet, you'd tax the church for so daring.
"From a purely church perspective, to defile a worship service with a political/campaign event is hugely problematic."
Political speech from the pulpit isn't necessarily defiling. What's said might be, but the mere fact that it deals with political issues...which are not disparate from religious issues...is not. It can often, if not most often is, applying Scripture to our walk through this world. To support politicians...like Democrat or Communist or similar party politicians...very blatantly runs afoul of religious beliefs and doctrine. It is enlightening to know how support for one candidate might result in that which is anathema to Christian beliefs. Said another way, it's a teaching moment, just as any sermon section of a worship service is.
"If a church I attended did this, no matter for who, I'd be gone immediately."
For me, it's only a matter of how they do it. As I suggested above, it should not interfere with the primary...that is THE....purpose of worship. But following worship, they can break out the partisan banners if they like. Again, there may be many who are interested in knowing how their vote may or may not align with their religious beliefs. Their pastor can inform them.
"I addressed the tax exempt issue.
It's exactly what Jefferson was referring to in his church/state letter, to keep the state out of the church."
Not at all. Jefferson assured that government can't interfere with a church. He never said those of the church...who are citizens as much as anyone else...are still free to speak on government and political issues. He wasn't getting in the way of that. Keep in mind, the great concern of the founders was to keep the government at bay, reducing its interference in the affairs of the people as much as possible and practical. Not preventing the people from involving themselves from the affairs of government. Not a consent of the governed situation if the governed can't give their consent.
"One thought on the tax exempt thing. It's a status that is offered to certain groups which comes with certain limits."
In the case of churches, that status was endowed without limits. Limits were imposed upon them in the 1950s with LBJ's anti-1st Amendment bill which stifled the 1st Amendment rights of churches. It is absolutely a bill which imposes the will of government upon the people, and it should be stricken. It allows the government to dictate the speech of American citizens on the false premise that they somehow cause harm or denied their rights due to an exemption granted because of what the churches do for society. It's absurd.
What follows is a great explanation for the folly of threatening the tax exempt status of churches for daring to speak its mind to its flocks about that which is important in their lives...their spiritual lives included:
https://adflegal.org/article/no-strings-attached-why-government-shouldnt-tax-churches/
Art,
If you want to make a case that restricting churches political activities in return for tax exempt status is a bad idea, make that case somewhere else. The reality is that today's churches operate under today's tax laws and if they violate those laws they should deal with the consequences. FYI, the tax laws don't prevent churches from talking about politics, they prevent churches from certain partisan activities.
I was quite clear when I said "political/campaign event". I DID NOT say that zero politics should come from the pulpit. I did say that what comes from the pulpit needs to align with the tax laws that churches benefit from. Are you suggesting that churches should violate the laws they benefit from with impunity?
That's what I said, Jefferson wanted to keep government out of the church. No one is suggesting that church members be prohibited from engaging in politics, no one is suggesting that pastors can't address politics at al, it's simply a matter of following current law. What you or they like is immaterial. When an organization claims tax exempt status they agree to follow the restrictions that go with that status. If they choose not to follow those rules they agreed to, they should lose that status.
Who cares? Current law is what it is. If you want to make a theoretical argument that it's bad, feel free. The reality is that if a church knowingly violates the restrictions they agreed to, they should accept responsibility for the results.
Look, if you want the Church to become an arm of a political party that's what it is. I look at history and watch what has happened when the Church involves itself in politics and it never seems to benefit the Church and it also never seems to improve the state.
Post a Comment