Man of Depravity - Tyler Braun's posts on Church Ministry, Worship, Seminary, and Theology.

Pulpit Endorsement: ADF and the Pulpit Initiative

2008 September 30

by Tyler

I had another post planned for today, but after reading about this story from all over the place today I have decided to chime in.

On Sunday September 28th, 2008 (2 days ago), 33 pastors from around the country endorsed one Presidential candidate or the other during their message or sermon during a Sunday morning service. This whole idea is organized under the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) as a “Pulpit Initiative”. HERE is a good news video about the story. One pastor who was a part of this organized effort said, “If we [pastors] can tell you what to do in the bedroom, we can certainly tell you what to do in the voting booth.”

Here is the catch (that many of you know about), all of these pastors broke U.S. tax code and are putting their churches in jeopardy of losing their tax exempt status. ADF says, “It is time for the intimidation and threats to end. Churches and pastors have a constitutional right to speak freely and truthfully from the pulpit – even on candidates and voting – without fearing loss of their tax exemption.” Generally speaking, the ADF represents what I would consider very conservative, and in some cases fundamental, Christianity.

Here are some of my thoughts:

I believe the heart behind all of this is very, very good. Many people want to hear from their pastors on where they stand on certain issues and what the Bible has to say about it. Many Christians need guidance in political areas because politicians confuse them greatly. Most politicians muddy the waters, so to speak.
With that said, I could not disagree more with the decision to move forward with this by these 30 or so pastors. Their main desire is for the IRS to revoke tax exempt status and for there to be a court case over this issue. I find the move to be incredibly selfish.
This goes back to the idea of whether God promotes partisan politics. I believe he does not. No where in the Bible to we hear about whether God promotes top down or bottom up economics, or if God would raise taxes or install a large financial bailout package. This idea that God would always vote for the Republican or Democrat is ill-founded and wrong.
I can only imagine the kind of unspoken division this will create in those churches. If you support the candidate other than the one supported by the pastor…are you less of a Godly Christian then, or should you have to repent of your sin? I feel badly for those people who were thinking those thoughts on Sunday.
Because this has been a bigger news story than anything on this issue before (many other pastors have endorsed from the pulput but few have received this kind of fanfare for doing so), it would be stupid for the IRS not to do something. I think these pastors are going to get what they asked for.

What do you think about pulpit endorsement?

You can subscribe to my posts HERE

Filed under: the rest... Tags: church

http://ash-nits.blogspot.com ash

i have said before, i will say it again, i do not endorse pastors preaching politics from the pulpit. becoming political is dangerous. and people should not blindly vote for who their pastor votes for. jesus avoided politics and while pastors are entitled to an opinion, their endorsements can cause strife in their church or create robots and neither are good. somebody wants to find out what their pastor thinks AFTER the service? great. a pastor should tell his flock to go educate themselves by the Word and the current political issues and make the decision they feel is most in line w/ their heart…make their own choices. shrug~
http://jocelynmiller.typepad.com Jos

I totally agree with Ash.

I don’t really care who my pastor is voting for – and I certainly won’t be a lemming that just goes along with the crowd. It’s pretty pathetic when you think about how many people will cast their vote based on what a highly visible person (actor, musician, pastor) says. A well educated voter gets their information from all sides and then makes a decision. If you aren’t willing to do the work, study this issues and candidates, then you shouldn’t be voting.

What’s most disconcerting is the blatant law breaking of these pastors. Just as we aren’t to pick and choose parts of the Bible to follow, you don’t get to pick and choose what laws you follow. It is incredibly arrogant and selfish of these pastors to put their churches in jeopardy and once again, gives credence to the perception that Christians think they’re “better” than everyone else.
http://manofdepravity.com Tyler

Jos and Ash- Way to bring it ladies!

That is a great point about how it makes it look like Christians think they are “better” than everyone else. I hadn’t thought of that, but it is very true.

I just hate this line of thinking: “If you want to be a true Christian you will vote for ____________”
http://www.jeremiahfilms.com/released/ Wayne

If the only reason the pastor in your Church has not endorsed a candidate, is because the he is afraid of the IRS, your church needs to hire a different pastor.

I’ve linked to this post from Pulpit Endorsements: The Sky Will Not Fall
http://manofdepravity.com Tyler

Wayne-

There is a big difference between respecting the laws of the US and being scared of the IRS. My pastor has not endorsed a candidate and as far as I know, he won’t. And for that, I am very happy. Of course, his reason for not doing so has nothing to do with the IRS. Even if there weren’t tax laws forbidding churches for playing partisan politics I would still say that endorsing politicians is a nasty game that churches and pastors should be above.
http://www.jeremiahfilms.com/released/ Wayne

Tyler-

My pastor will not be endorsing any candidates either, the odds that they do what they promise is not so good. But the question remains – should big government have their nose in what pastors say. The law was created when PAC used Churches to get tax free status … today they no longer have the desire to do so because McCain Feingold gave them special 527 tax status.
http://www.aworshipfulheart.typepad.com jan owen

I would be terrified to endorse someone – frankly I am afraid they would never do what they say, etc. I also just don’t appreciate the pressure you’ve mentioned – if I don’t vote for who my pastor says then am I less spiritual? So I am against pulpit endorsement. I think it can bite us all in some big ways that will impact our congregations and churches negatively.

That said, I do think we should have the absolute freedom to say what we want in church…..fear of the government should not enter into our mindset and is one of the things I am most thankful for as an American.

I guess these guys will have to decide if what they want to say is more important than tax exempt status.
http://www.aworshipfulheart.typepad.com jan owen

Okay, part of my comment did not make sense except in my head. Paragraph 2 above – One of the things I am most thankful for is freedom to worship and say what I believe without fear. I thought this but did not write it out coherently. Sorry!
http://frazierblog.com Paul Frazier

AMEN. Very well said.
http://www.jeremiahfilms.com/released/ Wayne

Erik Stanley, senior legal counsel, Alliance Defense Fund … clarifies what his intentions are in this statement http://news.google.com/news?btcid=44aae458dd65e67b

“Contrary to what some are saying or reporting, the Alliance Defense Fund is not attempting through its Pulpit Initiative to convert churches into political action committees. Neither is it an effort to force the politics of the “religious right” into churches, as Barry Lynn of Americans United for Separation of Church and State contends. Indeed, the Pulpit Initiative is not concerned with whether a pastor decides to speak about candidates or decides not to. And if a pastor does, it does not matter to our legal efforts if he is talking about “right wing” or “left wing” candidates. In fact, ADF invited churches from a wide variety of denominations to be a part of Sept. 28′s Pulpit Freedom Sunday.

No, the Pulpit Initiative is simply about letting churches of all types decide for themselves, instead of having the decision made for them by the Internal Revenue Service. The purpose is to restore the right of pastors to speak freely from the pulpit without fear of punishment by the government for doing what churches do: speak on any number of cultural and societal issues from a biblical perspective.”
http://manofdepravity.com Tyler

Jan- Well said, I totally agree.

Thanks Paul.

Wayne- All I needed to see is who the leadership of ADF was to be able to determine whether I would agree or not. Once I saw that Mr. Dobson was on there they lost any chance of me respecting what they are doing. To me he represents everything about religious right politics and therefore I think you can throw ADF in there with them. That is great that they wanted to get people from “both sides” but in all practicality this was still a religious right move.
Denise

I stumbled onto this blog looking for more information on why churches in my lifetime have been politically correct. It looks like I am older than many of you, if not all of you reading/commenting here, having been a teenager in the 1970s. If you’ll permit me, I would like to throw out these questions/comments as I fully believe you are capable of mulling over them at your convenience. I have no power in and of myself to do in you what only the Holy Spirit can, but I feel I must share a few things.

I agree Christ was not political but why did He get into political trouble anyway with the Jewish/Church leaders of the day and the Roman authorities? Could it be that though His greatest mission was to be the one-time sacrifice for sins so that mankind could return to God, that His compassion for His creation put Him in a place to talk about life, about the laws that make men right before God and all of these laws eventually affect governments? In other words could it be that His mere life talks such as the Sermon on the Mount and every moment he spent preparing the disciples for their mission, talking and healing those created in His/God’s image along the way pointed to the very things that not only make men right individually but also make them right societally?

If you hear me saying we have to impose all of these laws (and yet we do make laws against murder and stealing so some morality must be legislated for the good of mankind), I’m not, but we do have to teach them so that all men have true choices, and should they make mistakes/sin, teach the way back to doing the right thing. If we don’t teach these laws, ideas, philosophies in our homes first, then encourage them in schools and speak from the pulpit about them, how then are we getting the truth?

All men should be free to speak their consciences, particularly those whose minds are fed on the Scriptures and a love of history, which helps us recognize the current versions of past mistakes that we may avoid them. In church all preachers/pastors have a duty to the chosen local eldership, so they are not necessarily speaking for themselves. Yet, to give one man such power over our thoughts is idolatry. May I suggest that we let the preachers speak and then go out and test the spirits ourselves first in Scripture and then with sound thinking of which our minds are trained over time to recognize; it won’t happen like an episode on television but with steadfast studying.

All the best to each of you!
Denise