Silencing the American Pulpit
Earlier this year, a number of my friends complained when a prominent church leader shared her views on why she was supporting a particular presidential candidate. Despite the fact that she and her husband had assembled a team of leaders who have virtually transformed the modern church culture into one that has powerfully impacted the world, many of these friends were ready to unfriend and unfollow her. One person summarized her feelings this way: “I don’t go to church to be told how to vote.” The woman who had inspired and encouraged them for years was now no longer needed, simply because she dared to share her political views.
In America, it isn’t acceptable to share your views on who should be elected if you happen to be a church leader. That’s a privilege your forfeit when you go into ministry. This is partly due to the idea we have that the church and state ought to remain separate. But it’s also due to the fact that nearly every church in America has chosen to file for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status. It’s become an accepted fact that churches and ministries are required to obtain 501(c)(3) status with the IRS if they wish to remain exempt from paying taxes (an idea that is widely accepted—but unfounded).
Churches were never asked to file for this status until 1954, when Senator Lyndon Johnson was running for re-election and was being opposed by two tax-exempt organizations. In order to silence them, he added a provision to a massive tax overhaul bill that made it illegal for tax-exempt organizations to publicly support or oppose political candidates. Johnson attached his provision to the tax bill and it was never discussed in senate hearings. It simply became law and it made the political activities of his opponents illegal. And in doing so, it also made the public sharing of political views by religious leaders illegal.
The 501(c)(3) tax law prohibits political campaign activity by a church by defining them as an organization:
“which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.”
Because leaders have been told they must obtain 501(c)(3) status, and because they believe it may be revoked if they engage in political campaigning, many have opted to remain silent. It’s not that leaders can’t speak to political issues in general. They’re allowed to discuss abortion, welfare, taxes, the economy, and other political topics. But when it comes to supporting a specific candidate, this is where the line has been drawn in the sand. Although no church has ever had its tax-exempt status revoked, few are willing to risk losing what they perceive to be an essential part of their ministry.
Historically, church leaders have taken an active role in political affairs. Israel’s kings were anointed by the prophets. Every wise king they ever had understood that he needed a prophet’s counsel. And a king who failed to heed the voice of the prophet was assured of ruin.
Times have changed. We no longer allow prophets to choose our heads of state. But prophets still receive revelation from God about who He would have occupy our highest offices. God has not changed His ways. The revelation is still available if we want it. And although the government (and some believers) would prefer the prophets remain silent about our elected leaders, I think we would be wise to consider their insights before casting our votes.
Many of us are opposed to the mixing of politics and religion. It can be a messy business. But I believe that as Lance Wallnau has taught for years, the church’s true calling is not to be isolated from the world like an island, but an active participant which helps determine the course of history. If we’re going to be salt and light, we must influence every area of culture; education, arts & entertainment, business, media, and government.
If our leaders are content to remain silent about politics and government, they’re telling us by example, we should remain silent, too.
Is this the kind of influence we want to have on our culture?
If you’d like to know how your church or ministry can be free of the restrictions of 501(c)(3) status, read on:
Are Churches Required to File for 501(c)(3) Status?
Churches and ministries are not required to obtain 501(c)(3) status to be tax-exempt. From the founding of our republic, they have always been by default, tax-exempt. Although tax-exemption for religious organizations has been challenged in the Supreme Court, the Court has always upheld the fact that they must remain tax-exempt, even if they choose not to file for 501(c)(3) status. The government cannot decide whether a religious organization is tax-exempt. All religious organizations are considered tax-exempt by default.
My wife and I are the administrators of a tax-exempt ministry. We’re considered tax-exempt not because we’ve received a 501(c)(3) status (we’ve never even applied for one) but because activities such as teaching the bible, healing, deliverance, and prayer are considered Christian ministry. You may donate to our ministry and deduct it from your taxes as a charitable contribution, simply (and only) because our primary function is advancing the Christian faith. That fact, by itself, means our ministry is tax-exempt.
We’ve chosen, not to file for 501(c)(3). The IRS has another status churches and ministries can apply for which is the 508(c)(1)(a) designation. It offers all the benefits of the 501(c)(3) status with none of the drawbacks. The application for this status can be filled out in a few minutes and is usually processed quickly. Organizations under this designation are not subject to the restrictions of political involvement of 501(c)(3) status. The forms required to be filed each year by the IRS are much easier to complete. Helping Hand Outreach has helped many faith-based organizations convert to the 508(c)(1)(a) status. (If you’re interested in learning more about them, you can click on the link provided.)
She did not share her views to cause anyone to vote one way or another. Okay, I’m getting a bit grouchy here. She might have said this once? I read her posts and rejoiced that she courageously made her decision public, and when she said she got really negative responses from some that even went on to decide to unfriend her, my response was shame on us. When did we get so small minded that we think because someone is a leader in a church that they can’t share who they want to vote for? She is a beautiful woman of God, faithful and I applaud anyone who wants to reveal their true feelings about ANYTHING. If my pastor decides to make his beliefs known about who he wants to vote for, oh well. I’m a big girl, if I don’t agree with him, I’ll vote for who I think God wants me to vote for. Geez, can’t we all just grow up?
My former pastor, (now deceased) John Wimber (Anaheim Vineyard Christian Fellowship), had some thoughts on this tax exempt / government interference issue back in the late 1980’s. Back then the discussion was in regards to how much tax money local, state, and federal governments were losing to churches (and other non-profits). John’s comments one Sunday were that maybe the churches should just pay taxes like any other business and then the government wouldn’t be able to complain about what was preached from the pulpit in regards to politics. In my opinion, churches are businesses. Our pastors sell books, DVD’s, etc. Our worship teams sell CD’s. It would be a blessing to our communities if we paid our fair share instead of looking for a tax break. Don’t we always complain about how someone or some business gets unfair tax breaks ? Many cities are going bankrupt and some like the city I live in have asked the churches and non-profits to help pay for the services they receive like police, fire, ems, by just paying a small percentage of what a regular business using the same building in the city would pay. Unfortunately, the churches here declined stating it would jeopardize their tax exempt status and hurt their outreach ministries. Maybe it’s time to rethink the issue instead of looking for more cleaver ways to beat the system.
Wow, good to know about the 508(c)(1)(a).
Rafael Cruz has a very good presentation about why the church should be involved in politics. I believe he did it at the Kenneth Copeland ministers conference. It was extremely informative, and he talked about how the first battle of the Revolutionary War was fought in front of a church by the members of that church.
On a side note, Donald Trump announced at his evangelical leaders meeting on Tuesday that he would take the Lyndon B Johnson amendment out of the 501(c)(3).
Just to clarify, the first battle of the American Revolution was “fought” by some 60 militia men of the Lexington militia led by Captain John Parker. It was “fought” on the Lexington Commons. The conflict lasted only a couple of minutes. In the end, 8 colonists were dead, 9 wounded, 2 British regulars were shot, 1 in the hand, one in the leg. The British eventually continued on to Concord where the 2nd battle of the American Revolution took place at the North Bridge. I’m not sure where Mr. Cruz got his information, but I can not find any facts to support the story of the first battle being fought in front of a church by church members.
I was not clear in my wording at all. I apologize for that. I went and re watched Mr. Cruz’s speech. Seven out of eight of the militia men who died were members of Pastor Clark’s church (some argue that all eight were). Lexington commons was right by Pastor Clark’s church. I’ve also read that all the men of that militia were from Pastor Clark’s church. Whichever way, without Christians the Revolutionary war never would have happened.
I love everything you do an say my friend