Should Religious Leaders Endorse From the Pulpit?
Reader Comments
I side with those in favor of separation of church and state.
As a minister with over three decades of experience and an Associate Professor of ethics at a private Christian university, I side with the "Con" position of Barry W. Lynn. Tax exemption for charitable organizations is a privilege, not a right. Certain conditions go along with that privilege.
When you endorse a candidate, three things can happen:
1. The other candidate will win and you are left with much less potential influence with the candidate in power. That is not good.
2. The candidate you endorse may win and he or she may turn out to be a disgrace and an embarrassment to you for your endorsement. That is not good.
3. The candidate you endorse may win and those who were opposed to your candidate might feel hostility toward you if you are in a position of influence due to your endorsement. That is not productive of peace and bi-partisan relations with other.
If one endorses one side of an issue, rather than a candidate, these problems are minimal or non-existent.
One thing that irritates me are the so-called "unbiased" charts which give opposing candidates' views. All of those brief summaries that I have seen are driven by an agenda. All of them that I have seen are not unbiased, but rather they contain a significant amount of spin.
Thank God for our Constitution and Bill of Rights which gives us freedom of religious expression and protects us from those who want to use government power to impose their views on others. As an evangelical Christian, I remember with gratitude that Jesus promoted his agenda with logic and persuasion without any recourse to political power.
Read the thoughts of Roger Williams
As a direct descendant of Roger Williams, the founder of the Baptist Church in this country and the founder of Rhode Island, I suggest all men of the cloth of any character and persuasion read..."Roger William" by Edwin S. Gaustad. You will find that this country was founded on the separation of church and state and Williams was one of the few early founders who noted they were escaping the tyranny of the English crown which prescribed a state religion and the Puritans of New England continued to do so. This is why Williams was banished from the Massachusetts Colony and founded RI. It is also why the first Jewish Synagogue and first Quaker meeting house are in RI. It is called freedom of religion which should not be confused with the right of free speech.
If you understand that concept, then as a pastor and someone involved in a 501 organization you should become acquainted with the Laws of Not For Profit organizations and learn why you receive non-tax status.
You might also want to read the works of Rev. Dr. Peter Marshall if you think you can measure up to his standard of being the Chaplain of the U. S. Senate.
As a professional executive for forty years of not for profits, I also suggest if you do not want to “Render under God what is God's and render under Caesar what is Caesar's”, then forgo your tax free status and then you will be abiding under the Laws of the Constitution of the United States of America...otherwise your are in breach of the laws of this nation and you might be more comfortable in someplace like Iran and take on the role of an Imam.
Pulpit Politics is Free Speech
Reading Johnson's reasoning, changed my previous way of thinking. So, my vote is YES. Preserve the right of free speech. Don't like what's being said from the pulpit, get up and leave. There's another church probably within walking distance! Pastors, speaking from the pulpit, the public sidewalk, the soapbox in the park....speaking anywhere must not feel any fear to speak freely. How could I have ever believed otherwise!!
Rev Wright
Does this apply to Rev Wright, or does he get a pass because he is a liberal democrat?
FREEDOM
If ministers/ pastors / preachers want to express their political views in the pulpit, this is America, and they should be able to do so without any other repercussions than causing discord within their congregation. Churches have split, and pastors have been fired for speaking these things, but if someone wants to take the risk, they should have the freedom to do so- it is protected by the constitution.
However, there are some social and moral issues that loom large in our society that the Bible speaks very clearly on, and no minister should be muzzled when it comes to applying what the Bible says about the issues of the day. Christians believe the Bible is the Word of God, and preaching truths from it is fundamental to their faith.
Another point....I wonder how many American Muslim clerics openly endorsed Obama or speak politically without fear. There must be plenty of them, no? Why does the media, the government, etc. seem to have the agenda of silencing Christians?
Church's dont want to seperate from State
They want to control it, so they can manipulate the system through laws which exclude whomever they deem unfit. They have taken the beauty of Gods love and compassion and turned into a filthy and disgusting power play. Everyone sees it as harmless, everyone thought that when Hitler began also. Just remember this, today it may be the gays, tomorrow it could be the divorced, the single parents, they see not limits as they are so blinded by their own self righteousness. Christian used to mean something warm and caring, now it means be like me or perish at my hand, God must be so disappointed.
I say if the Church's want to lobby for enforcement on the free to be like them, then pony up the taxes it takes to make these government entities run.
Endorsing politicians from the pulpit
In reference to the above subject, what true religious leaders are looking for is to protect "freedom of religion". We're looking to uphold the right to preach from the Bible, which is the direct revelation from God. We cannot accept what certain groups of people are trying to call "hate speech" just because we read and preach certain verses from the Bible in which they do not agree with. There are other beliefs in which we Christians do not believe in, such as the ones that preach killing anyone who does not believe as they do. THAT IS "HATE SPEECH". We don't go around saying it offends us. Other beliefs tell us that what we do offends them and therefore try to get laws changed. What about the things that offend us? Of course, no one does anything about "hate speech from other beliefs. for fear of reprisal. They know that Christians don't go to extremes such as carrying out threats and that's why our Lord Jesus Christ is blasphemed on TV, News, Art Museums, The Motion Picture Industry, and the like. I don't agree that religious leaders should be able to endorse politicians because the Word of God specifically tells us that it is God, Jehova, who places leaders in their positions, weather they be good or bad. We should vote according to the morals and values of a candidate. Thankyou.
Is there a financial undercurrent to this discrimination?
From the Miami Herald:
David Caton, executive director of the Florida Family Association, said the group plans to collect signatures for a charter amendment in Hillsborough County that would pre-emptively outlaw spending taxpayer dollars on same-sex benefits.
''We're going to use the momentum from the marriage amendment to speak to the fact that most people in this state don't want a recognition of that type of relationship,'' Caton said. ``At this time of economic stress, our government should not be providing benefits to nonemployees on the basis of their sexual relationships.''
That renewed focus contrasts with the underdog status of gay rights opponents just one year ago.
-----------------------------wow.
We need protection from these people. Equality needs to be everybody's concern. This year it's gays, next era, whomever they deem undesirable. We need the Constitution to protect us. I always suspected that there was a financial undercurrent behind this discrimination. Never did I think it would be made so evident. If these "loving Christians" cared so much about family, they'd care about all children. It's really so ugly. What quality of spiritual soil are their roots planted in, if this is the fruit that they bear?
Religious leaders' endorsement of candidates
NO! NO! NO! Church leaders violate the separation of church and state when they get too deeply involved in politics. Endorsement of a specific candidate should strip them of their exemption from taxes including real estate tax.
The problem today is not direct endorsement of individual candidates, but "implied endorsement" via issues that are contrary to church beliefs. McCain/Palin had resounding endorsements from Evangelical and Catholic leaders via the abortion issue. Right or wrong, abortion is LEGAL in this country. If churches wish to challenge laws then they should not be tax-exempt.
