Cracks in the wall: church and state

Given the number of breaches of established law by the Trump regime, it would not be surprising if you missed this one: the IRS has freed churches to endorse political candidates. 

Since 1954, something called the Johnson Amendment to the IRS code had prohibited tax exempt religious institutions from taking a partisan side in candidate elections. When working campaigns, we would always assure diffident religious institutions that they could certainly offer a moral opinion on the issues of the day. But directly endorsing a candidate was a no-no. 

Right wing churches complained that the prohibition infringed on both their First Amendment rights of free speech and free exercise of their faith; besides the prohibition on endorsements was rarely enforced. (In the only slightly memorable mainstream instance of attempted application, the IRS did threaten the tax status of All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena in 2006 over an anti-Iraq-war sermon by retired Rev. George Regas. That went nowhere.)

Now the Trump regime is getting rid of this theoretical impediment to pastors' electioneering. The legal standard is now: “communications from a house of worship to its congregation in connection with religious services through its usual channels of communication on matters of faith do not run afoul of the Johnson Amendment as properly interpreted.” That means (I think) if it's part of a talk at the church or a sermon, the endorsement is just an intra-family utterance and that's fine.

Like journalistic explorer of the Christian right Sarah Posner, I can't get too exercised about this new IRS dictum: if a religious leader isn't able to convey social values in their preaching that lead congregants toward ethical political choices, there's something wrong with their communication skills. 

In our history, Black pastors have not been squeamish about standing and speaking for political messages. Historian of the Black church Jemar Tisby offers some strong opinions about which political interventions can empower religious communities and which would debase religious messages. 

What Do We Do? 

Pastors and church leaders should resist the temptation to endorse particular political candidates. 

Instead, they should teach their congregations how to think wisely and lovingly about the uses of political power, the call to public justice, and the pursuit of the common good. 

Congregation members have a responsibility, too.

Members of faith communities should pay careful attention to partisanship in the pulpit. They need to be prepared to ask pointed questions about the stance of their leaders on matters of conscience like choosing who to vote for.

And they should be prepared challenge their leaders, or even leave, if the faith community becomes a tool of partisan players. 

All faith communities should speak the truth in love to political leaders about the way power is being deployed in our nation. 

But when the church aligns itself with political power—endorsing candidates, seeking influence, anointing political “kings”—it abandons the self-sacrificial, justice seeking, truth-telling witness modeled by Jesus. 

A church that crowns candidates cannot carry a cross.

• • • 

Meanwhile a focus on what the Trump authorities might do to encourage already politically active white Christian nationalist religious bodies should not distract from what they almost certainly will do by way of the IRS to interfere with legitimate charitable activities. Faithful America passes on a warning: 

...  the chairmen of the Committee on Homeland Security -- Rep. Mark Green and Rep. Josh Brecheen launched an investigation into more than 200 organizations that provide aid to immigrants and refugees. These nonprofit groups -- including many religious organizations like Catholic Charities, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, and Global Refuge -- received a letter demanding to know if they used "taxpayer dollars to facilitate illegal activity." 

While these organizations are not required to respond to the inquiry, Green and Brecheen indicated that the Committee may take unspecified "further measures" if they do not comply. 

These organizations have well-established histories of refugee resettlement and serving immigrant communities -- in other words, of welcoming the strangers. ...

This is the arena in which we need to fight the good fight to keep the state out of our work and for our continued free exercise of the moral imperatives of religion.