Pastors plan to preach politics from the pulpit

Not sure who you should vote for in November? Not to worry -- if you attend one of several dozen churches in California and 21 other states, your pastor's going to stand in the pulpit and tell you who it should be.

No big deal, save for that whole "separation of church and state" thing and the fact that IRS rules say that's grounds for religious organizations to lose their nonprofit status. Which turns out to be the whole point. Details on this bit of civil disobedience (and a poll) from Duke Helfand:

Setting the stage for a collision of religion and politics, Christian ministers from California and 21 other states will use their pulpits Sunday to deliver political sermons or endorse presidential candidates -- defying a federal ban on campaigning by nonprofit groups.

The pastors' advocacy could violate the Internal Revenue Service's rules against political speech, with the purpose of triggering IRS investigations.

That would allow their patron, the conservative legal group Alliance Defense Fund, to challenge the IRS' rules, a risky strategy that one defense fund attorney acknowledges could cost the churches their tax-exempt status. Congress made it illegal in 1954 for tax-exempt groups to publicly support or oppose political candidates.

"I'm going to talk about the un-biblical stands that Barack Obama takes. Nobody who follows the Bible can vote for him," said the Rev. Wiley S. Drake of First Southern Baptist Church of Buena Park. "We may not be politically correct, but we are going to be biblically correct. We are going to vote for those who follow the Bible."

Wonder how just how literal a reading of the bible Rev. Drake intends. Considering that in Leviticus alone we're told not to shave or cut our hair, wear clothes made of more than one fabric, and that adultery is punishable by death, I'm guessing truly biblical candidates may be scarce.

That's Wiley S. Drake in the photo, shot back in 1999. He's not too happy about the IRS' current interpretation of the separation of church and state.

Meanwhile, please click on over to the story, where you can vote in our poll -- should pastors be allowed to preach politics. So far -- and this will likely change several times -- the answer is "No."

--Veronique de Turenne

Photo: Don Kelsen / Los Angeles Times

Comments

[chris p]

It should be well noted that JUDAS ISCARIOT tried to use Jesus' ministry as a platform for political and military uprise.
He was in extreme error to say the least.

Jesus rebuked Peter in the Garden of Gethsemane for trying to use force on Jesus' captors putting to rest any misconceived notions that this was some uprising.

There are many other examples where Jesus went to great lengths to distance himself and his ministry from being considered political or military.
I am sickened by many things in the pulpit and find this "vain revolution for political freedom of speech" particularly irreprehensible and contrary to the teachings and overall impetus of Jesus' ministry.

As a sideline note I would also like to point out that none of the candidates are running for office of priest or pastor.
To criticize one politician for being "pro choice" or in favor of stem cell research while giving full support to a candidate who advocates fully the use of war, torture, and nuclear armament not only for defense but also as a " first strike" option, is garbage and contradicts all that Jesus came to establish as his message and legacy.

I would like to add another thought that sacrificing a church's tax exempt status is extremely irresponsible when considering that the minister is being entrusted with money that did not come from him nor belongs to him.
(see all the biblical listings for stewardship).

I would like to charge and challenge all elders and/ or board members to challenge and rebuke your pastor if you feel he is abusing his post of shepherd for the sake of spewing politically in a place that should bring respite from all of this rather than becomming a platform for it.

[Larry linn]

Please G*d, I pray that you use your power to allow the houses of worship express political endorsements based upon what you tell the religious leaders in personal visions. I am sure that if they want to participate in elections, and that they will be willing to pay taxes like other businesses and other taxpayers. As I pray to thee, please tell me why you inflated your son to 800 to 900 feet, had him tell a television evangelical that he had to raise hundreds of millions of dollars to find a cure for cancer? Lord, since you are G*d, would it not have bee easier to just tell this Evangelist the cure?

[Larry linn]

Please G*d, I pray that you use your power to allow the houses of worship express political endorsements based upon what you tell the religious leaders in personal visions. I am sure that if they want to participate in elections, and that they will be willing to pay taxes like other businesses and other taxpayers. As I pray to thee, please tell me why you inflated your son to 800 to 900 feet, had him tell a television evangelical that he had to raise hundreds of millions of dollars to find a cure for cancer? Lord, since you are G*d, would it not have bee easier to just tell this Evangelist the cure?

[Robert Rowley, Tucson, Arizona]

The complete fact of the matter is this. A 501 c3 religious tax exemption is not a right. It is something applied for and possibly granted. When a church applies for a 501 c3 status they go into it knowing what the rules are. Therefore, either accept the rules of that for which you are applying or do not have it. If you cannot agree to the rules of a 501c3 then you shall not have the exemption.

IRS, please do your duty, uphold the law, and if these churches preach politics from the pulpit, PLEASE revoke their tax exempt status immediately!

[Jen]

Erik Stanley, senior legal counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund, says: “This is not something these churches want to do in secrecy and hiding. In fact, they don’t believe they’re doing anything wrong. They don’t believe they’re violating the law.

“What they’re doing is talking to their congregations about biblical issues related to candidates and elections, and they believe they have the constitutional right to do that.”

If they don't want to do this in secrecy and hiding, then why won't the ADF release the full list of churches participating until after the event has happened? Clearly, they want to shut down any protests, thus violating the rights of free speech and assembly of those who don't agree with them. What hypocrisy!!

[harrybrandi]

September 25, 2008 Christianity's Reject of God's Commandment

Can God lie? God told Eve that "He will be over you". God turned to Adam and told him that because he "listened to his wife" he will live a laborious life and then die. Can this be one half truthful?
Modern Christianity. will not recognize that this is both a commandment and a promise, as is all of god’s desires. The promise that the male and the female are to not be equal was for all, and for ever.
Jesus Christ followed His Father's will in everything, including the differences between the male and female, but modern Christianity has deliberately changed the bible's repeated instructions, and Jesus's example, on this mater. God made man in His own image and He made the female - for man- in man’s image eons later. Jesus could have appointed a female apostle or a female disciple, but He didn't! He could have made some sort of statement that she could draw from in the future that would show His approval of her equality to the male, but He didn’t! He followed His Father's designs and desires in every way. He did leave us a clear message about her though “ Whosoever looks on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery already with her in his heart”
Much of modern Christianity teaches that the will of the Supreme Being is of little bearing on us today and God's expressed commandment is an untruth. God will keep his word forever as has been demonstrated by the everlasting blessings of the promised ones. If anything of Gods desire is not practiced it is a sin. God cannot lie.

In1911, near the time of the invention of the printing press, the Holy Spirit answered the request of a group of Christians that they be led while writing His holy words. This took place in a King James’s structure and consequently the book was named after him. This bible is directed to man but under the guise of “a better interpretation” Christianity has been changing it ever sense 1920. This change has been slow and veiled. It has aided Satan's displacing man's first need of a loyalty to God to hers.
Most of the bible’s focus on the female is negative. Jesus Christ sent St. Paul to the Gentiles to put in writing His requests of us, but now the Gentiles play like they can’t read the parts that apply solely to her. God's desires do not change; man does. Eve has led Adam to Satan again because no one checked the bible before they placed the issue of an equal vote for all on the ballot with the19th amendment. We intermixed our idea of freedom for all with God’s design of “the two shall be one”. This error has destroyed the family and needs to be corrected.

HARRYBRANDI.COM

[Jordan]

The separation of church and state should be maintained. Our forefathers planned this intentionally.

The Government should not dictate religious issues.
This includes dictating what religious leaders can and cannot say behind the pulpit.

[Michael]

I have long thought that churches should lose their tax exempt status, this just confirms it. Funny how many support Bush, when he is against pretty much everything they say they believe in.

[Rick]

The separation of church and state should be maintained. Our forefathers planned this intentionally.

Do we want the government dictating religious issues? I think not. No more than we need church leaders dictating political issues.

Ministers doing this are exploiting a captive audience and leveraging their influence. Not my definition of a Holy Man, more like a slime-ball. They're not "above the law". Bust 'em!!!!

[MontyMoose]

While pastors should obey the law, anything that the Blble says about our behavior as a Christian should be allowable in Church,
Drawing conclusions on which candidate has voted or spoken for or against Christian biblical behavior cannot be stopped by or muffled by laws stiffling any pastor.
As a BAC should I not be allowed to raile against the president of Iran when he shouts to destroy Israel.. and say for the Iranians not to re-elect him...
This is no different than saying vote democratic or republican for the following reason and then quote a bible verse to back it up!.
What makes our country so afraid that our pastors can not speak their minds..
Is a pastor more influential than when a president gets on TV to persuade people to vote for a person or party....

[jack]

I was expecting this as the last gimmicks from Carl Rove.Divide on racist/religious line and win!! This is being practised in third world coutries and now reached America.

God saves America!!

[Mollie in Atlanta]

This makes me so angry I could cry...

Why don't all those clueless bail-out protesters (who probably don't earn enough to actually pay much tax) should turn their ire on this group.

This is total BS and I hope it comes up in tonight's debate.

GO IRS!!! Don't chicken out - go AFTER these guys!

[Rob]

Good, I hope the IRS strips their Tax exemption and taxes the hell out of them.

[Chris]

Let's not even get into a debate over whether John McCain is more religious than Barack Obama, though that is dubious in itself. What these chruches are trying to do is undermine the separation of church and state. They want to have their cake and eat it too. I think not. The IRS should begin the process to revoke the tax-exempt status of any religious institution that meddles in political affairs.

It's a very Rovian ploy they are pulling at this moment. The Republican Party is throwing more red meat to the evangelicals, who will no doubt come out in droves should the Democrats move to denounce these churches. More evidence of their desperate, win-at-all-costs approach.

Disgraceful and a direct affront to American values. We should all ask ourselves how we can ever do anything about religious extremists in the Middle East if we keep electing them in the Midwest.

[Rodney Lamprey]

Churches should pay taxes. It would help the California budget.

[Famural]

The pulpit has been the internet, the television, the radio, and the newspaper of this country since before there was a country. The founding fathers may have been Southern Planters and New England Silversmiths, but the 'mothers' of this country were preachers telling their 'children' to wake up and get their heads out of their back pockets. Regardless of what preachers, rabiis, priests, monks, mullahs, imans, medicine men, witchdoctors, or whatnots say on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, or Sunday (remember that "Freedom of Speech" thing?), they should have every right to say it, to whoever will listen. It's really pathetic that we've become such a timid country of sheep; led around by the @#$%$^# IRS (and others of equally worthless character). No wonder we're falling apart like a house of cards in a hurricane.

[Anny]

Doesn't the bible condemn LYING and false testimony against your fellowman? By my count the McPalin duo have done that and then some.

Being the president is a JOB...the qualifications and temperment of that individual to do their JOB properly is how a vote should be cast...take off the blind fold people. False prophets are a dime a dozen these days!!

[Jordan]

The bottom line is that no government agency should be telling a pastor what he can or cannot say from his pulpit about his religious views and his church's teaching on current issues. This includes the right to apply the church's religious and ethical views to candidates and politics.

Churches should not have to surrender their first amendment rights in order to qualify for tax-exempt status.

[Ed]

Please, please if you've never studied the Bible in-depth do not reference it. It'll show your ignorance on the matter...taking passage out of context and creating your own interpretation does not constitute the intent and the spirit of the passage...stay on point.

[Bill Dwyer]

The comment about the Book of Leviticus prohibiting the cutting of hair or the wearing of mixed fabrics only reveals the "reporter" has not done her homework and has no real understanding of how Christians view the Bible. Why does the LA Times assign someone like this to cover this story? Is it good journalism to trivialize this important subject?
By the way, she forgot to mention that the African-American Church movement has a long history of endorsing candidates from the pulpit without losing their IRS exemptions. It's more the norm for black pastors to be active in political issues.

[john dennison]

Churches main function is to try and get people to do the right thing and to lend helping hands to people who are struggling. Instead they waste their time preaching against abortion and politics. The people who attend church have a mind of theirselves, they are not stupid. I believe there is a god, but i don't attend church anymore.If these preachers preach one word of politics they should lose their tax exempt status.

[jessie]

McCain committed adultery...isn't that one of the deadly sins?
Using the bible to urge people to vote against Obama is nothing short of racist. And coming from a minister?!