In Theory: On endorsements from the pulpit

In a previous In Theory, we discussed the Johnson Amendment — which prohibits churches and other religious institutions from endorsing political candidates or else risk losing their tax-exempt status — and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s pledge to repeal it.

According to a 2015 phone survey by LifeWay Research, nearly 80% of Americans say it’s inappropriate for pastors to publicly endorse political candidates during church service.

“Americans already argue about politics enough outside the church. They don’t want pastors bringing those arguments into worship,” said Scott McConnell, executive director of LifeWay Research, in a statement.

Q. Do you think it’s appropriate or inappropriate for pastors to make endorsements from the pulpit?

Ibelieve pastors should be allowed to exercise the same freedom of speech rights every other American enjoys, in the pulpit or out of it. The tax-exempt status of religious organizations should not suffer because its members exercise these rights.

While I believe it is allowable for pastors to make endorsements from the pulpit my preference is to directly address only the moral issues behind the candidates’ stands on various social issues. In my experience the most common of these have included abortion, the definition of marriage and the legalization of certain drugs. Scripture is crystal clear on most moral issues, so that’s what I address. The pastor’s (and the church’s) calling is to proclaim God’s word as it applies to the issues of the day. We are remiss if we do not. I don’t go so far as to recommend or criticize any candidate by name, but usually it’s common knowledge where primary candidates stand on the issues anyway.

I’ve also learned that my church members aren’t always homogenous in the way they vote. To endorse one candidate over another might cause an unnecessary division in our fellowship. And frankly, there are more important issues than who each member chooses to vote for.

When we choose to address potentially divisive issues how we say what we say is of utmost importance. Ephesians 4:15 says, “speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into him who is the head, even Christ,” so our truthful speech should be rooted in love. Ephesians 4:29 continues that our speech should be with wholesome words, ones that build up and not tear others down, with the object of giving grace to those who hear. Yes, we should also “reprove, rebuke, exhort,” but even that should be “with great patience and instruction” (2 Timothy 2:4).

Pastor Jon Barta
Burbank

My observation of pastors in pulpits is infrequent but not unknown. It is entirely possible that I have attended church many more times than a lot of believers, and as proof of the harmonic nature of the universe I did in fact go to church just this past Sunday.

At the Crescenta Valley United Methodist Church I took part in a good ol’ time song-fest led by a couple of visiting troubadour preachers, accompanied by CVUMC’s totally rockin’ band. (Check them out sometime at 2600 Montrose Avenue or at cvumc.org — why should we atheists have all the fun?)

Reflecting on the service, while not a single electoral candidate’s name was uttered by them, I have no doubt who the good reverends would want us to vote for, and I believe this is the likely case no matter who is in a pulpit. It is not brain surgery to assess a religion’s value system and align those beliefs with the available candidates, then choose.

Thinking of the world of nonprofits within which churches are just one category, do we really want to be told by our business/professional groups, historical societies and beautification clubs who we should vote for? I don’t, and I also don’t see why an exception should be carved out for churches without them losing their nonprofit tax advantage.

Appropriate or inappropriate is something that each congregation needs to decide for itself, and it seems like they may already have with 80% in the U.S. not wanting to hear pastors making political endorsements.

Roberta Medford
Atheist
Montrose

President Johnson, when he was just a Senator running for reelection back in the ‘50s, introduced his “Amendment” to the tax code to silence supporters of his opponent. Since then, it’s been used to diminish free speech in the pulpit, despite the fact that government has no right to impose itself upon our religious freedom. In fact, the government already taxes every member of our congregations, just like anyone else, but then they want to tax our charity and meeting place as well! Is this right? Our church feeds the homeless five days a week, twice a day. Who buys and collects the food, pays for the power, and works freely to accomplish this huge task? We do! And you want to tax us because on Sunday, when parishioners finally meet together for themselves to simply worship God and be taught from His word (the Bible) the minister may point out how certain corruption has entered the political arena (like this very subject)?

If it’s in our Bible, we need to see it, but I believe this goes far beyond occasional endorsements of political candidates, its also about preachers repeating God’s condemnation of certain sins that perhaps 80% of America engages in and doesn’t want exposed; things like adultery (infidelity), homosexuality (perversion), abortion (murder) and whatever other things our hedonistic, lecherous and materialistic citizenry enjoy. We may be a country of myriad religions, but our founding faith was Christianity, and so today most Americans identify with this default category. Unfortunately, these same people are least likely to have any genuine faith at all, and certainly nothing that changes their lives or their opinions Christward, lest this not be an issue.

How many know that our American Revolution was led by pastors, like Jonathan Mayhew of Boston, who preached to his congregation that fighting tyranny was a Christian duty? And remember Rev. James Caldwell, who supplied his congregation’s hymnal pages to be used as wadding for our military’s muskets? Pastors are obliged to preach the truth, and though their human personalities sometimes get in the way, the Bible is still the Christian playbook and its words need contemporary application for the church, and we need freedom of speech in our religious freedom or I say we have neither!

Once, when Christ’s apostles were threatened with prison and death, if they did not censor their words, St. Peter shouted, “We must obey God rather than any human authority” (Acts 5:29 NLT)! Death and taxes are certain …bedfellows.

Rev. Bryan A. Griem
Tujunga