Church leaders keep services neutral on elections

The Canton Repository ^ | Saturday, October 16, 2004 | By CHARITA M. GOSHAY Repository staff writer

[raynearhood]

Even before any of the Democratic hopefuls visiting his church service could utter a word, the Rev. Robert Dye, pastor of St. Paul AME Church in Canton, made it clear that no “stump” speeches would be allowed and that the church was politically neutral.

Dye told the group that while they were more than welcome to visit, “Sunday mornings are for worship.”

When it comes to politics, what can a clergyman say from the pulpit without getting into trouble with the IRS?

The Rev. Patrick Mahoney, director of the Christian Defense Coalition in Washington, D.C., is seeking a clarification on an Internal Revenue Service law that forbids churches and other faith-based organizations from actively electioneering, or risk losing their nonprofit status.

A Democrat, he charges that the IRS is violating the First Amendment by attempting to limit what worshippers pray for in their places of worship.

“As Christians, we are praying that God grant President Bush four more years because of his support for the sanctity of human life, his strong commitment to the protection of traditional marriage, and his stance on religious freedom and liberty in the public square,” Mahoney said. “It is clear that the public policies of the president are more in line with historic Christianity than those of Sen. Kerry. It is our hope that the IRS will not crush religious freedom by attempting to censor and control how churches feel compelled to pray.”

He said the question arose when he participated in a presidential forum in Lancaster, Pa.

“I talked about what was important in the race, I talked about issues that were critical, particularly those related to the faith community,” he said. “The pastor made it clear that we couldn’t be partisan, but when it came time to pray, I knew what the overwhelming majority of people there wanted: To pray for God to grant George W. Bush four more years. I didn’t do it. Later, it struck me very powerfully that not only does IRS code restrict what clergy can say behind the pulpit, but restricts what congregants can pray. I find that troubling. It’s an outrageous form of censorship on behalf of the IRS. If it were a church praying for Sen. Kerry to be president, I would fight for the right for a church who prayed for that way.”

Dye disagrees.

“There needs to be a separation of church and state,” he said. “My opinion is, the church ought to be neutral ground.”

According to IRS Publication 1828: “All Internal Revenue Code 501(c)3 organizations, including church and religious organizations, are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, intervening in and political campaigning on behalf of, or in opposition to any candidate for elective public office.”

“Voting is a moral, spiritual act,” Mahoney said. “It is not an act in a vacuum. ... It would be troubling if the IRS puts this kind of censorship on churches. How can the government come in and tell churches how to pray?”

The Rev. Knute Larson, senior pastor of The Chapel, a 10,000-member church with sites at University of Akron and in Green, said clergy have a higher responsibility to parishioners than telling them how to vote. Our main mission is to tell them things that are much more important than voting; I don’t mean that sarcastically.”

“It’s our obligation to pray our leaders.,” he said. “I fully support the (government’s) directive for churches to stay out of partisan politics ... I think the IRS has a right to say, ‘Don’t take sides’ since they’re giving us some tax benefits.”

Larson said he encourages members to “pray, vote with your conscience and look for deeper issues. It’s a tough call for people in this media-driven age. I trust our people to make right judgments. I don’t in any way tell them who to vote for.”

The Rev. John Mann, pastor of Trinity Lutheran Church in Canton, said he stresses to his congregation “the urgent responsibility for all citizens to exercise their right to vote.”

“I tell them it’s important to think prayerfully and to make as good a decision as you can. Secondly, you ought not let anyone else tell you what that decision should be. It’s each citizen’s right and responsibility to make that choice in light of information they gather. It’s wrong to be instructed in your use of your vote, even by religious leaders.”

Like Dye, Mann disagrees with Mahoney that the IRS policy suppresses individual rights.

“We do not feel the IRS’ policy is a violation of the First Amendment,” Mann said. “The concern that we’ve always tried to balance in religious life is the separation of church authority and political responsibility. Hopefully, what we teach people is that their religious belief should bring to bear thoughts of what they do politically.

“My fear is, religious leaders often react to a momentarily emotional important issue as if it should be the determining factor, as abortion is for some religious folks today. You can’t ignore that issues such as the death penalty or a just war are equally important theological concerns for Christian community.

Mann said another danger for Christians is thinking that if a politician shares a certain “strand of belief,” they’re more preferable as a political leader.

“(Martin) Luther said he’d rather be governed by a smart Turk than a dumb Christian,” he said, laughing.

“We believe God is not a passive bystander in the electoral process,” said Mahoney, who is on a nationwide “prayer tour” that arrives in Ohio later this month. “The issues that we face have moral consequence.”

Larson said advances in science have pushed the issues of morality and ethics to the forefront of modern campaigns.

“I remember reading about cloning, genetic engineering and euthanasia back in 1968,” he said. “I thought, ‘That will never happen.’ Scientific research has brought us to so many ethical issues.”

He said when considering a candidate, voters must take into account the entire gamut of moral issues, such as poverty.

Mahoney said that if he’s dissatisfied with the IRS’ response, his group may consider legal action.

Larson said people of faith should keep in mind their true priorities. “My highest belief is in God, of course. God will be sovereign, and all of us should take care of the higher issues first and vote carefully.”

[raynearhood]

Although the title of the article doesn't give you a good idea of the depth of the article, this is a very good piece that expresses both sides of the story without an ACLU opinion. This was a thought provoking piece. I agree that the IRS, or any goverment entity for that matter, should have any say in a church - so long as that church isn't violating the rights of other's or flat out breaking the law. At the same time, maybe a church should remain politically neutral. Though I disagree with Rev. Mann's view on the IRS limiting politics from the pulpit, I agree that the pulpit may not be the best place for politics; "Give to Ceasar what is Ceasar's..." and all.

I do believe, though, from a Christian and moral perspective, Pres. Bush IS clearly the better choice.

However, that discussion is better left for the foyer and fellowship hall than the pulpit.

[nmh]

How come Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson and Kerry show up at churches for a rally?

Oops, I forgot. The rules don't apply to Demoncrappers.

[Balding_Eagle]

Churches should remain politically neutral, but not morally neutral.

For example to pray for a president that will take a strong, moral stance on protecting our country is and should continue to be OK.

[LuigiBasco]

How come Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson and Kerry show up at churches for a rally?

Oops, I forgot. The rules don't apply to Demoncrappers.

That's a different story. We see Kerry almost weekly in black churches and not a peep out ot the MSM!

[Patton@Bastogne]

.


Mr. Silverback


This is such a pathetic situation.


Chuck Colson, and recently, Dr. James Dobson, have bemoaned the FACT that Christians can't seem to get off their lazy @sses and VOTE IN U.S. ELECTIONS.

Have they ever considered the POSSIBILITY that these Rank-N-File Christians' APATHY is God's Judgement against American Christian Churches (vis-a-via their IRS 501 C-3 Federal Tax-Exempt Status) ?


IRS 501 c-3 is a Federal Contract (US Supreme Court decision) that "earns" Religious Corporations hundreds of millions annually, paid from the US Government coffers, as "political hush money" (a la Webster Hubble, Monica Lewinski, ad nausea). Religious Corporations agree to abstain from candidate endorsements & legislative lobbying.



REPLY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 - Church Tax-Exempt Status : Why Created in 1934 ?

2 - Church Political Success : 1919 versus 1998 (General Patton vis-à-vis Richard Simmons).

3 - Christians' "Right-to-Know" : Primary Goal of Federal Lawsuit against Dobson, Falwell and Robertson.

4 - Biblical Commands AGAINST Church Tax-Exempt Status.

5 - US Churches : Frankenstein of Religious & Secular Entities



ISSUE-1 : Birth of Church Tax-Exempt Status - As Political Hush Money

Adopted by US Congress in 1934, immediately after Prohibition Repealed. WHY ?

Liberals FEARED the Awesome Political Power of Christian churches, especially after their successful Constitutional Amendment for Prohibition in 1919. Liberals wanted to "politically castrate" the Churches, and keep them "Out of the Game" forever. IRS 501 c-3 did just that.

Church Building Programs & Sunday TV-Broadcasts get BIG BUCKS (courtesy of tax-exempt donations). Meanwhile, Prayer is removed from Public Schools, Ten-Million Babies are butchered like Dogs, and the Nation descends in an abyss of moral degeneracy.



ISSUE-2 : Who had/has more political power ?

Option-1: US Churches in 1919 (14 years BEFORE tax-exempt status) in their Campaign for Prohibition, without the benefit of CBN's satellite TV network.

Option-2: US Churches in 1998 (64 years AFTER tax-exempt status), with pathetic defeats on the Abortion Holocaust, TV Pornography, Prayer removed from Public Schools, Prayer removed from University Graduation ceremonies, an Educational Disaster, and the culmination of all abominations, President William Jefferson Clinton (with all his decayed baggage of murder, sex scandals, and unparalleled corruption).



ISSUE-3 : Why did I launch a Federal Lawsuit against Icons of the Christian Religious Right, especially since I endorse 99-percent of the Christian Socio/Political Agenda ?

To expose the leadership's "dirty little secret" about IRS 501 c-3 (et al). Lawsuit demanded that ALL church members receive an explanation of the "voluntary" political activity restrictions of Dobson, Robertson, Falwell, et al.

IRS 501 c-3 is a Federal Contract (US Supreme Court decision) that "earns" Religious Corporations hundreds of millions annually, paid from the US Government coffers, as "political hush money" (a la Webster Hubble, Monica Lewinski, ad nausea). Religious Corporations agree to abstain from candidate endorsements & legislative lobbying.



ISSUE-4 : Why is "Political Tax-Exempt Status" such a Spiritual Abomination, with Churches having a "sweetheart Deal" to not pay Federal Taxes ?

There's NO FREE LUNCH (especially from Governments), as clearly taught by Jesus Christ. His "Render Unto Caesar" acknowledged that Rome would demand a Quid Pro Quo (something in return) IF they let Him get away with not paying taxes.

(Exodus 23:8) "You shall not accept a bribe, for bribery makes the discerning man blind and the just man give a crooked answer" (NEB).

(Deuteronomy 16:19) "You shall not pervert the course of justice or show favor, nor shall you accept a bribe; for bribery makes the wise man blind and the just man give a crooked answer." (NEB)

(Matthew 6:24) "No servant can be the slave of two masters ... You cannot serve God and Money". (NEB)

Therefore, GENUINE (I surrender all) Christians are clearly forbidden to accept money or gifts for Silence on Any Issue, albeit spiritual or moral. Church tax-exempt status absolute violates God's clear requirement that Christians say whatever needs to be said, regardless of the consequences or retribution.



ISSUE-5 : US Churches : Frankenstein of Religious & Secular Entities

I’m NOT a lawyer, just an Engineer, so my knowledge of Religious Corporations was acquired slowly after many hours in the Tulane University Law Library (New Orleans).

The US Supreme Court recognizes that US churches are comprised of TWO "Separate But Equal Entities".

Just like US segregation laws before Civil Rights …

Entity A : Religious Piece / Independent of US Government Control

Legal Jurisdiction over Theology, Prayers, Hymns and other Spiritual Stuff, etc.

Entity B : Secular Piece / Potential Slaves to Federal Tax-Exempt Law

Legal Jurisdiction over Money, Property, Purchase Orders for Hymn Books, Insurance Contracts, Payroll, Corporate Officers & Boards of Directors, Zoning Permits, Water & Electric Utility Bills, Salaries, Bonuses, Air Conditioned Dog Houses, Legal Fees, TV and Radio Broadcasts.

IF --- a Religious Corporation is under IRS 501 c-3, then ALL of the Secular Stuff is UNDER FEDERAL CONTROL.



LEGAL CASE STUDY : Bob Jones University vs. United States (1973)

Bob Jones University (BJU) prohibited inter-racial dating and marriage between it’s Staff and Students. The US Justice department said this violated the "pre-eminent" policy of US Racial Integration Policies.

BJU replied that their prohibition against inter-racial dating and marriage rested EXCLUSIVELY on their Theology and Biblical Interpretation. US said that their Federal Integration Policy was more important than BJU’s theology, especially since BJU was a Federal Contractor vis-à-vis IRS 501 C-3.

US Supreme Court ruled against BJU in 1973.

BJU’s Response : Jettisoned their Tax-Exempt Status, so that they could faithfully follow their Biblical Beliefs and Convictions. Moreover, BJU was NOW free to engage in Political Activity to their heart’s content, NO LONGER SPIRITUAL SLAVES to their Federal Tax-Exempt Masters.

Copy of Federal Lawsuit available upon request.




Patton@Bastogne
Free Republic Member since 1998.



General George S. Patton Jr. Website




.

[Patton@Bastogne]

.


BTTT



.

[c-b 1]

“There needs to be a separation of church and state,” he said. “My opinion is, the church ought to be neutral ground.”

What a load of bovine excrement, that attitude is what has allowed massive corruption, to creep into the government, and the morality of the citizenery to deteriorate to the level of an alley cat.

[bayourod]

"the Rev. Robert Dye, pastor of St. Paul AME Church in Canton, made it clear that no “stump” speeches would be allowed "

However for a mere $10,000 a candidate can buy a 2" X 2" ad in the nonpartisan church voters guide inserted in the church bulletin the Sunday before the Tuesday after the first Saturday in November.

Texas churches used to have a tradition of not allowing candidates to speak. Instead they sat in the front row so everyone could see exactly how much they dropped in the collection plate. However the Reverend would mention the new van the candidate donated to the church.

Stump speeches were reserved for the BBQ after the service at which candidates had donated calves, hogs, goats etc...

Many a Reverend has been seen driving a new car after a successful election day turnout.