Wednesday, 01 October 2008
-
Is Your Pastor Speaking Freely? 501c3 Controversy
by mr oak I was reading biblerapture's post about the 30 pastors who are fighting a tax code law that prohibits them from conducting political campaign activities to influence elections. We talked about this briefly in a previous post as it pertained to presidential candidates.
But how about this - according to one site, "For a 501c3 church to openly speak out, or organize in opposition to, anything that the government declares "legal," even if it is immoral (e.g. abortion, homosexuality, etc.), that church will jeopardize its tax exempt status."
Wait, wait, wait a minute - this sounds like merely talking about abortion and homosexuality during service will jeopardize a church's tax exempt status! Granted this sounds like a stretch of the code...[edit]
Pass the Aura says this:
According to the IRS, any 501(c)3 exempt church or organization is totally free to talk about whatever political topic they want to talk about, and to lobby to change laws!! (As long as it's not a "substantial part" of their activities, i.e. they're not a political organization masquerading as a church, and they don't make it their business to campaign for specific candidates.)In other words, this whole "issue" is not an issue. Your pastor's freedom of speech is quite secure, as is your church's tax exemption. It's a complete misunderstanding (or misrepresentation) of the relevant tax laws and ought to be considered an urban legend.
Nevertheless what if this was true - what if pastors are refraining from certain topics because of the law? What would you think if your pastor did this?
RecommendRelated Posts
Post a Comment
- Back to revelife's Revelife Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in revelife's local time zone: GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)
Comments (34)
A church doesn't have to be 'tax-exempt' in America. If a pastor is concerned about the issue, then he or she should not seek tax-exemption. Simply as that.
That is ridiculous, and yes, it is trying to censor pastors. I doubt it will be too long before it's illegal for pastors to speak against those things publicly. Pretty soon it won't just be the tax exemption issue. It won't be legal, period. I predict they will pass some sort of hate speech law (already happening in England) that outlaws public speech against homosexuality.
My pastor wont (NO Christian should) change what he teaches jsut because we could loose our tax exempt status or even worse punishment.
God's Word is what we are supposed to follow not man.
@Pickwick12@xanga - It already happened in Canada too.
I can see that coming too.
i would think my pastor was a coward...the law will be challenged...they cannot endorse specific candidates or political parties, but discussing biblical tenets and encouraging people to consider candidates' positions on issues as it relates to scripture is perfectly legal....@no_more_grace@xanga - hahahahahah
@no_more_grace@xanga - Correct. 501c3 is not necessary for a church to function in its primary purposes. Dump the tax exemption and speak freely.
I'm all for those 30 pastors. It's a violation of the first amendment to not allow the pastors to speak of morality and politics while at the pulpit.
I think that's a misunderstanding of the laws, but I'd have to double-check to be sure.
Partisan politics is not the business of the church anyway.
My former pastor was a professional tax accountant by day. He made sure our church was compliant with all the relevant laws, and he didn't have any qualms about saying something was a sin. His full-time job was to understand tax law, and this whole issue simply wasn't an issue for him.
Interestingly today... all this week I've been blogging on this very same subject.
Guess this is the hot topic for the week.
@Tom - But no one is not allowing them to do that. The problem only arises because they want to be tax-exempt. Simply drop the tax-exempt status, and then there is no problem.
@tialoca_talks@xanga - No clue why you laughed at what I wrote.
@no_more_grace@xanga - But, if you drop their tax exempt status you raise their costs greatly, likely closing many churches.
OK. "According to one site..." That one site is wrong. Completely wrong. In fact, it makes me wonder what their agenda really is, since they can't possibly be motivated by a proper understanding of the legal issues about free speech.
According to the IRS website, which I think we can agree is more authoritative, a 501(c)3 tax exempt organization "may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates."
In other words, if you're spending a significant portion of your time trying to change the laws or campaigning for political candidates, you're not a church anyway, you're a political organization. Of course laws about churches don't apply if you're not one. Another section actually goes so far as to say "A 501(c)(3) organization may engage in some lobbying" as long as it's not a substantial part of their regular activities. Which it shouldn't be anyway.
It doesn't say that you can't talk about the laws, or even that you can't disapprove of the laws. That would be obviously unconstitutional. It's just that the work of changing laws does not belong to the church (though they are certainly free to express their opinions even under the existing laws!) but to citizens in the appropriate political channels.
In other words, the exception is there not to keep churches from saying anything they believe, but to keep political activist groups from masquerading as religious groups and thus getting unconstitutional tax exemption.
The church ought to be above all that anyway. We're supposed to be preaching the gospel, not telling people who to vote for.
The organization that's linked to in this post seems extremely sketchy to me, when compared to the actual IRS code they caricature. Lots of completely groundless fear-mongering and no real grasp of the issues involved (and lots of plugs for buying their conference tapes!). Are they trying to turn the church into a political machine?
I don't think the church should be a political machine. Church and state should be kept separate at all times, anyway. Regardless, my priest speaks freely, and so does my girlfriend's pastor. The freer someone speaks, the more I respect them.
@Tom - If churches close, their congregations will adapt and move to other churches. I fail to see why that would be a problem when the congregation'll move onward anyway.
This is similar to the problem in China. The Chinese government allows state-sponsored churches. However, they are limited. They cannot talk about the return of Jesus or His Kingdom hereon earth. As a result, you have the underground church. They refuse to compromise their teachings for the government, so they must remain in hiding.
As for endorsing political candidates, I think the church is already in bed with politics much more than it should be. I'm glad it's illegal for churches to endorse candidates. If it wasn't, we'd be more off-focus than we already are. We already have a King, we don't need to spend our time an energy pushing for a new leader of a secular government. That's not to say it's not important, it's just not the mission of the church.
As a pastor, I have the opposite problem. I'm skeptical of politicians, and living in an area with a lot of military bases and a lot of traditional "Republican Christians" I'd get myself in trouble by suggesting that it's not mandatory for Christians to be involved in politics or to vote Republican. Luckily, I'm not the lead pastor so I don't have to decide whether or not to talk about those things.
In brief, for those of you who don't want to wade through my long comment above: According to the IRS, any 501(c)3 exempt church or organization is totally free to talk about whatever political topic they want to talk about, and to lobby to change laws!! (As long as it's not a "substantial part" of their activities, i.e. they're not a political organization masquerading as a church, and they don't make it their business to campaign for specific candidates.)
In other words, this whole "issue" is not an issue. Your pastor's freedom of speech is quite secure, as is your church's tax exemption. It's a complete misunderstanding (or misrepresentation) of the relevant tax laws and ought to be considered an urban legend.
Tell all your friends!
@Pass_the_Aura@xanga -
Well stated.
seems like state wants to regulate church ... whatever happened to separation of church and state :D
I was taught in my Christian management class that it is fine to talk about political issues as long as you present both sides. If a pastor is constantly telling people how to vote they will get in trouble, but if the simply address the issues and let people know the it is up to them to choose there is no issue. They can voice their personal choices, but they cannot push them on the congregation.
@Tom - I understand your argument, but I'm simply not buying it. As far as I can tell, the NT church wasn't tax-exempt, but they seemed to do just find. If not being tax-exempt would 'close down churches,' then I think that those churches should rethink how they're doing things. The underground church in China isn't tax-exempt, yet they don't have a problem.
The issue is that we don't even know what the church is anymore. Read the Bible; what it describes as the church is a far cry from what most Western Christians think of when they hear the word.
@Pass_the_Aura@xanga - Yeah, I was kinda confused by this, b/c it was always my understanding that pastors can talk about issues or whatever during their sermons, but that they're just not supposed to say "You need to vote for ________ and I'm supporting that same person for office." They could say that you should vote pro-life, but just not say to vote for ________ politician who is pro-life (assuming they want to stay tax-exempt). Thanks for clearing this up! Hope that someone from Revelife sees this :)
@Tom - Also, how does that explain churches in Australia? They are not tax-exempt in the same way that churches in America can be. So how do you explain a church like Hillsong there?
The problem with that code is that it's not specific. How much is "substantial"? It could be interpreted in different ways. As America becomes more and more secular and liberal, I can see people twisting that code and making it illegal to speak about homosexuality if you are tax exempt.
@no_more_grace@xanga - And I don't really understand what you are saying in that comment. Because the NT church was illegal. Yes, they obviously "got along fine" because the church is still here today, but they were greatly persecuted because they were mostly illegal. So I don't really know what you are talking about in it being not "tax exempt". It seems irrelevant. The same goes for the underground church in China. In fact, they ARE tax exempt because they are not registered with the Chinese government. That's why they are called "underground". Their leaders and members are also harassed and put in prison on a regular basis. So, that seems irrelevant as well.