Are you a good person? Click here to take the quiz and win a prize!

Are You Out of Work? Click here

To find out why we believe Jesus rose from the dead click here

This month’s featured article

A word about immigration

What are you prepared to lose?

By Dr. Gregory Tomlin

FORT WORTH, Texas -- In 1954, a middle-aged Texas senator introduced a revenue act that muzzled most political rhetoric in houses of worship in the United States.

Senate Majority Leader Lyndon B. Johnson realized when he introduced the legislation to regulate political activity on the part of non-profit organizations that it would prohibit churches from “participating or intervening in any political campaign on behalf of, or in opposition to, any candidate for public office.”

According to a 1998 report in the Washington Times, Johnson pursued the legislation because two conservative non-profit groups in his home state had opposed his re-election bid. It appears that the bill was proposed in a spirit of vengeance.

Since then, any church that has accepted tax exempt status as a charitable organization has been prohibited from expending funds donated to the church for political reasons.

The revenue act was reinforced in 1986. In every election cycle, the Internal Revenue Service issues a warning to those groups that might transgress its tax code. In 2000, the IRS issued a memorandum that stated that a 501(c)(3) organization -- your church -- cannot “endorse candidates, make donations to their campaigns, engage in fundraising, distribute statements, or become involved in any other activities that may be beneficial or detrimental to any candidate.”

I agree as a matter of principle that churches shouldn’t spend a solitary penny of their budgets on political activities. I wouldn’t want to see what money I had intended for foreign missions or hunger relief drained into a political campaign. Political speech, however, is different.

Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AU) said in 2002 that religious leaders have “a clear right to use their pulpits to address moral and political issues,” but that they shouldn’t engage in partisan politics in support of a specific candidate. That means the pastor could not oppose a pro-abortion, pro-homosexual candidate by name from the pulpit and stay within the charitable organization guidelines set forth by the IRS.

AU issued their opinion in response to the introduction of a congressional bill, HR 2357. Proposed by North Carolina Rep. Walter Jones, the bill sought to restore the right of political speech to churches while allowing them to maintain 501(c)(3) status, provided that political activity did not consume a significant amount of their budgets.

The Houses of Worship Political Speech Protection Act was cosponsored by 133 Republican representatives and seven Democrats, but was defeated in October 2002.

In the history of our nation, houses of worship were once the center of community life. Political speech in churches was commonplace and the shared moral vision of the churches influenced government. Many of the democratic ideals that influenced the founders of the nation were birthed or grew in Baptist circles. Two of those ideals, freedom of religion and freedom of speech, were incorporated into the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Today, political speech is absent in great degree from American churches. I believe it is because pastors and churches fear that endorsing a candidate or denouncing the evils of another’s policies could mean the loss of 501(c)(3) status or, at the very least, the imposition of penalties.

The threat is real. In 1992, a conservative, non-denominational congregation in New York launched an advertising campaign that claimed that the abortion policies of then presidential candidate Bill Clinton were tantamount to rebellion against the laws of God. For its advertisements in USA Today, the Church at Pierce Creek lost its tax exempt status in 1995 and spent a great deal of time and energy to regain it.

In this political season, each pastor and congregation will have to decide how involved in the political process their church wishes to be. They will have to ask themselves serious questions.

Have churches become so consumed with being sheltered from tax burdens that they have ceased to be politically prophetic? Are pastors more concerned with avoiding an appointment with the IRS than indicating which candidates they support, especially when those candidates are Christian brothers and sisters who could infuse government with Christian principles? Will a pastor remain silent if the choice is clear between a candidate who embraces liberal culture and one that supports biblical values in society?

Most Americans do not want houses of worship to have political influence. A March 2002 survey by the Pew Forum on Religion in Public Life suggested that 70 percent of Americans want the church to stay out of politics, to remain silent on the great political issues of the day. That’s because that same 70 percent doesn’t want to see Christian values raised as the standard in political life.

It is time to challenge our own assumptions, false as they are, that the church has no role in American politics. If pastors see a clear choice between candidates based on a comparison of their platforms with Scripture, they should say so, all the while realizing that they may not convince a single person of their position.

Those who are silent are irrelevant in the political process.

It is every pastor’s constitutional right to allow his religious opinions to infuse his political rhetoric. The ultimate question is whether or not the pastor or the church is willing to pay the price to exercise that right. Both might find that surrendering tax-exempt status and writing a check to Caesar provides extraordinary freedom to engage culture and inject biblical values into the nation’s political experience.

That is, I believe, what Christian citizens were intended to do.

[NewChurch Austin] [About God] [About the Bible] [About Us] [About You] [Our Beliefs] [Events] [Awesome Links] [Politics] [Hebrew and Greek] [Recommended Businesses] [Free Speech] [Tough Questions] [Reading List] [Parables] [Sermons]

This website is copyright 2002 and 2006 by NewChurchAustin. Articles and papers are copyright by their respective authors.