If President Donald Trump has his way, pastors, preachers, ministers and the like could soon stand before their congregations and publicly trumpet one political candidate over another.
As with many issues today, opinions are divided on whether or not that’s a good thing.
Trump has pledged to “totally destroy” the Johnson amendment, a law approved more than 60 years ago that bans tax-exempt churches from publicly endorsing political candidates.
His vow has been applauded by some who assert freedom of speech and First Amendment rights while others are uneasy at the merging of church and government.
Bill Leonard, a professor at Wake Forest University School of Divinity, said his main hesitation is that repealing the amendment would divide churches along party lines.
“Would you want to see signs labeling churches ‘First Baptist Republican’ or ‘Mount Pisgah Democrat’?” Leonard asked. “Yes, some congregations lean left or right in large, but for a church to endorse a particular candidate, it takes the chance of dividing its own membership.”
People are also reading…
Bringing political conversation into the religious sphere could not only alienate church members but bring churches into uncharted waters, he said.
Repealing the amendment — which is part of the tax code and would require action by Congress — would allow churches to directly or indirectly participate in a political candidate’s campaign.
“It would become: Do we give (money) to help the poor or to help the party?” Leonard said. “Church and state aren’t a clear-cut division even now, but to do away with the Johnson amendment would just create some level of political and religious chaos.”
But religion can play a part in politics and, without the intersection, there would have been no civil rights movement, he said. It’s striking the balance between political censorship and in-your-face political endorsements that is tricky.
“I think churches should be free to speak out on issues, like injustice or lack of compassion,” Leonard said. “It’s whether we get in bed with a particular political party, that’s the whole question.”
It’s a question local churches have grappled with as they envision what the repeal of the amendment would mean for them.
Pastor Chris Byrne of New Friendship Baptist Church said he is in favor of repealing the amendment.
“I don’t think the amendment is necessary,” said Byrne, who has been a pastor for 15 years at the church on Old Lexington Road in Winston-Salem. “Churches should be able to speak freely on issues without fear of political retribution.”
A conservative Christian nonprofit organization, Alliance Defending Freedom, has attempted to challenge the Johnson amendment in recent years through the Pulpit Freedom Initiative, which urges churches to violate the statute in protest.
Byrne said he was one of many asked to participate by sending in a video of the act of defiance, but he has never participated and doesn’t see the need.
He doesn’t endorse political candidates in his church, he said, and his support for the repeal is rooted solely in the issues outlined in Scripture.
“I think conservative candidates more closely align with Scripture: marriage between a man and a woman, life and conception, consumption of alcohol,” he said. “That said, I think repeal would mean addressing issues more than the candidates.”
Even with a repeal of the amendment, Byrne doesn’t foresee much changing at his church or others.
“It wouldn’t change much for me,” he said. “I don’t want to be in the habit of attacking candidates or political parties that some church members are affiliated with.”
Pastor Kelly Carpenter of Green Street United Methodist Church in Winston-Salem said it’s better not to open the door into the political realm to find out.
Repealing the amendment could create a divisive congregation and put pressure on churches to lean one way or the other, Carpenter said. The amendment was put in place for a reason, and churches endorsing candidates overstep their bounds.
“I don’t have a problem with politics in churches. I have a problem with partisanship in churches,” he said. “I feel committed to our congregation being very nonpartisan and I think that’s what the Johnson amendment is all about.”
Carpenter said he doesn’t foresee a floodgate of pent-up political ranting should it be repealed and thinks churches would remain leery of endorsing candidates, despite facing more pressure.
Repealing the amendment is more of a political move by Trump, he said, and he doesn’t imagine it would have a huge ripple effect in the religious community.
“Some churches will be emboldened by that, but most will come down in the middle,” Carpenter said. “Just because we have permission to be partisan doesn’t mean we will be.”