Jun 26 2008
Should the IRS restrict talk about politics from the pulpit?
[NY Times]
Bill Keller, an evangelist based in Florida, runs “Liveprayer.com,” an Internet call-in program. Because he receives a government tax exemption, he is prohibited by law from endorsing or opposing candidates for public office. But during the Republican primary battle, Mr. Keller proclaimed to his followers and the news media that “a vote for Mitt Romney is a vote for Satan.”
Now Mr. Keller says he is being investigated by the Internal Revenue Service for involvement in partisan politics. He asserts that his denunciations of Mr. Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts who is a Mormon, were religious and not political.
Mr. Keller regularly stated on his program his claim that Mr. Romney’s church did not represent “biblical Christianity.”
By making the investigation public, Mr. Keller says he is hoping to prompt a legal challenge to the I.R.S. prohibition. And he is not the only religious leader pursuing this strategy.
The Alliance Defense Fund, a conservative legal group, is recruiting 50 pastors to endorse candidates from the pulpit on Sept. 28, hoping to provoke a legal challenge to the I.R.S. code.
“We’re asking pastors to make specific recommendations based on Scripture as to how their congregations should vote,” said Erik Stanley, senior legal counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund.
Read about it here.
[From me]
To call Mr. Romney Satan is a stretch. To say he is the brother of Satan is another story since the Mormons believe Lucifer and Jesus were brothers. But I digress. I’ve made my view on this pretty clear. I don’t like the mix of politics and religion. I don’t think it was wrong for Mr. Keller to point out the differences between Christianity and Mormonism. I don’t have a problem with a pastor talking about the faith of candidates. But I think there is enough baggage in both parties to point out evil either way.
Why don’t we as a churches focus on ministering to people on both sides of the aisle and encourage our members to get involved in politics because it is their duty? We got our tax exempt statuses to transform our communities through service not being Political Action Committees.
What do you think?
6 responses so far
Here’s something about which I actually have TWO thoughts. One is that it’s the law, and believers ought to be the best examples of those who obey the law.
Second is that religious entities should not dabble in politics, like endorsing or condemning certain candidates. I’m all for this priesthood of the believer thing, and that includes our spiritual leaders feeding us on the bible and then trusting the Holy Ghost to lead us and not think they need to lead us like sheep to the voting booth.
Bob Cleveland’s last blog post..Amazing Grace? Indeed. Amazing.
Kevin,
My thought has always been two fold:
1) Encourage the vote! Challenge the people to vote their convictions! That is our right, and responsibility! Shout it from the pulpit.
2) We, as Christians, have plenty to focus on without telling people how to cast their vote. We’ve got the Great Commission to fulfill! We’ve got the challenge of Acts 1:8! As far as I am concerned, those two things are far more important than who will be elected in the next cycle of elections! Or the next cycle. Or the next.
Raise up church! Focus on the primary job we have, not the primaries!
M. Steve Heartsill’s last blog post..If I Were God…
Politics is about the ethical use of power. To say that the church shouldn’t comment on important issues - slavery, abortion, the gay agenda, etc. - just because they are labeled as “poltiical” would be ludicrous. I realize that may not be the IRS issue here, but some people take the “no politics” thing way too far.
The IRS shouldn’t be restricting speech at all. I mainly just think it is a bad idea to talk about specific candidates, laws or not.
Stick to the Gospel and the issues that flow from there (i.e., don’t murder would mean don’t abort).
Neil’s last blog post..Death bed conversions Q&A
I agree with bob. I will not…I repeat will not…endorse any person or party from the pulpit. My primary call is to preach Christ not to preach politics-pro or con. I have also let my feelings be known about the ADF’s challenge. I will repeat it: it is pure garbage and dangerous to anyone taking that challenge. There is a arrogance there that I am extremely uncomfortable with. “Say what you want and allow us to defend you.” Then what happens if they lose (a real distinct possibility given our culture).
Bill(cycleguy)’s last blog post..Sad Words
It’s appalling what the ADF is doing. The rule from the IRS is clear. The ADF is looking for some sort of test case to pitch to some judicial activist court to undermine the established law.
Any challenge should lose, because the law is so clear. The culture wouldn’t trigger the loss, but a court upholding the law through strict construction would.
It shouldn’t be hard to find a whole bunch of ministers electioneering from the pulpit over the July 4 weekend.
Honestly, I prefer the IRS NOT regulating pulpits. However, I also prefer pulpits NOT regulating politics.
Too bad neither the government nor the church have the ability to stay in their own spheres of influence.
Michael’s last blog post..Ecclesiastes Chapters 9-12 : Some Concluding Remarks on the Book of Ecclesiastes