“You can’t talk politics in the church; everyone knows it’s against the law.”How often do you suppose this will be said over the next few weeks? It will be said enough that it would be good for Christians to understand what the law is and where it came from.For the first 178 years of our country’s history, politics were freely discussed in churches. In fact, one of the early leading preachers, Dr. John Witherspoon, signed our Declaration of Independence, helped author the Articles of the Confederation, and even served on more than 120 congressional committees as an elected official from New Jersey. He was the President of the College of New Jersey (now called Princeton), whose motto was “Dei sub numine viget,” which means “under God’s power she flourishes.”As Witherspoon’s example shows, our founders did not have a problem talking about politics in church. On May 17, 1776, the Continental Congress declared a National Day of Fasting, Humiliation, and Prayer for God’s guidance in the war. That same day, Dr. Witherspoon delivered a sermon titled “The Dominion of Providence over the Passions of Men,” and he publically addressed England’s attempt to control the colonists’ laws. Witherspoon said, “I call this claim unjust, of making laws to bind us ‘in all cases whatsoever’…If your cause is just, you may look with confidence to the Lord, and intreat him to plead it as his own. …The cause in which America is now in arms, is the cause of justice, of liberty, and of human nature. So far as we have hitherto proceeded, I am satisfied that the confederacy of the colonies has not been the effect of pride, resentment, or sedition, but of a deep and general conviction that our civil and religious liberties….”(If you would like to learn more about our country in the form of a historical Bible studies series, go to IFAResources.com and look for the “Country of Character” series.)There was complete freedom to talk about politics up until 1954. On July 2, Representative Lyndon Johnson made a motion on the floor as the House was debating the 1934 IRS Tax Law when he said the following:Mr. JOHNSON of Texas: Mr. President, I have an amendment at the desk, which I should like to have stated.The PRESIDING OFFICER: The Secretary will state the amendment.The CHIEF CLERK: On page 117 of the House bill, in section 501(c)(3), it is proposed to strike out “individuals, and” and insert “individual,” and strike out “influence legislation.” And insert “influence legislation, and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office.”Mr. JOHNSON of Texas: Mr. President, this amendment seeks to extend the provisions of section 501 of the House bill, denying tax-exempt status to not only those people who influence legislation but also to those who intervene in any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for any public office. I have discussed the matter with the chairman of the committee, the minority ranking member of the committee, and several other members of the committee, and I understand that the amendment is acceptable to them. I hope the chairman will take it to conference, and that it will be included in the final bill which Congress passes. [Emphasis added.]And with that short interchange the Church was “muzzled.” There was no debate. There was not a committee that looked into this, it just happened. Subsequent writings of both his staff and Johnson himself indicate that he never intended this legislation to apply to churches, just “non-profits.”Why did he do this? History is not clear-cut, but he was in a difficult reelection campaign, and two outspoken anti-communist non-profit organizations in Texas were neutralized because of this legislation.To summarize, today’s interpretation of the law is that, yes, you can talk about politics. It must be done in a non-partisan manner with an effort to educate people about issues. To understand today’s interpretation of the law check out the Pew Foundation’s excellent publication on the issue:“Religious Organizations…are prohibited from participating or intervening, directly or indirectly, in any political campaign on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for elective public office. This prohibition encompasses a wide array of activities. It precludes direct political activity, such as the making of statements, whether oral, written or in an electronic medium, supporting or opposing any candidate, political party or political action committee (“PAC”), creating a PAC, rating candidates and providing or soliciting financial support (including loans or loan guarantees) or in-kind support for any candidate, political party or PAC. It also precludes indirect political activity of a sort that reflects bias for or against any candidate, political party or PAC, such as distribution of biased voter education materials or conduct of a biased candidate forum or voter registration drive.”The Church in America needs to understand where our laws came from and why our laws exist. The most important question we need to ask ourselves is, what is God’s perspective on the law? If the laws are unjust, as Witherspoon put it, “you may look with confidence to the Lord, and intreat him to plead it as his own…the cause of justice, of liberty, and of human nature.”Now when someone says “you can’t talk about politics in church,” you can give them an answer with depth and confidence.
Read more…
