It’s that time, once again. It’s time for the mainstream press to be terrified of that fact that, for millions of Americans, the content of their religious beliefs frequently has implications for what happens inside voting booths on Election Day.
This happens all the time on both the Religious Left and the Religious Right, although it appears to be more common in sermons on the political left (click here for more on that from Baptist progressive Ryan Burge).
If you have any doubts about press concerns about this issue, see this recent collection of headlines from one of those daily Pew Research Center emails about religion in the news:
* Churches are breaking the law and endorsing in elections, experts say. The IRS looks the other way — ProPublica
* Virginia pastor investigated for campaigning during church services — The Associated Press
* The senator-pastor from Georgia mixes politics and preaching on the trail — The New York Times
* Black church tradition survives Georgia’s voting changes — The Associated Press
* ‘We need to make America godly again.’ The growing political influence of Latino evangelicals — CNN
* Battle for Catholic vote inflames Pa. governor’s race — Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Remember that GetReligion mantra: Politics is the true faith of most elite-newsroom professionals, who — functionally — believe that politics is the only answer If you want to get something done in the real world. Politics is real. Religion? Not so much. Thus, it is logical that religious faith is important to the degree that it affects politics.
Is the blue-zip-code press more worried about political influence on the conservative side of this equation? Of course, especially this soon after an earthquake like the fall of Roe v. Wade. I would also admit that, at the moment, the stunning rise of nondenominational, independent evangelical and Pentecostal churches has made it even harder for reporters to cover what is and what is not happening in the institutions that define conservative Christianity..
This brings me to that ProPublica investigation that hit social-media the other day: “Churches Are Breaking the Law by Endorsing in Elections, Experts Say. The IRS Looks the Other Way.”
Here is the oh-so-predictable overture, which doesn’t mean that it isn’t valid:
Six days before a local runoff election last year in Frisco, a prosperous and growing suburb of Dallas, Brandon Burden paced the stage of KingdomLife Church. The pastor told congregants that demonic spirits were operating through members of the City Council.
Grasping his Bible with both hands, Burden said God was working through his North Texas congregation to take the country back to its Christian roots. He lamented that he lacked jurisdiction over the state Capitol, where he had gone during the 2021 Texas legislative session to lobby for conservative priorities like expanded gun rights and a ban on abortion.
“But you know what I got jurisdiction over this morning is an election coming up on Saturday,” Burden told parishioners. “I got a candidate that God wants to win. I got a mayor that God wants to unseat. God wants to undo. God wants to shift the balance of power in our city. And I have jurisdiction over that this morning.”
What Burden said that day in May 2021 was a violation of a long-standing federal law barring churches and nonprofits from directly or indirectly participating in political campaigns, tax law experts told ProPublica and The Texas Tribune.
How widespread is this problem?
Burden’s sermon is among those at 18 churches identified by the news organizations over the past two years that appeared to violate the Johnson Amendment, a measure named after its author, former President Lyndon B. Johnson. Some pastors have gone so far as to paint candidates they oppose as demonic.
If you are worried about this happening in settings that cannot be described in terms of White Christian Nationalism, ProPublica did note:
While some Black churches have crossed the line into political endorsements, the long legacy of political activism in these churches stands in sharp contrast to white evangelical churches, where some pastors argue devout Christians must take control of government positions, said Robert Wuthnow, the former director of the Princeton University Center for the Study of Religion.
Wuthnow said long-standing voter outreach efforts inside Black churches, such as Souls to the Polls, which encourages voting on Sundays after church services, largely stay within the boundaries of the law.
Also, you can see — in this sidebar — that there are cases of potentially improper behavior on the left as well as the right. See this double-decker headline:
Texas Churches Violate the Law Ahead of Tuesday’s Election, Experts Say
Churches in Texas invited Beto O’Rourke and Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick to speak to their congregations before the 2022 midterms, raising questions about the effectiveness of the Johnson Amendment.
What is happening here?
I have been following these arguments for decades, dating back to the 1970s and my Church-State Studies degree at Baylor University, which is, of course, in the heart of Texas.
In my experience, we are talking about IRS officials — and maybe even a few journalists — making honest efforts to draw bright-red (or blue) lines between at least four kinds of behavior in religious congregations, as opposed to activist-group rallies (that may involve personnel from religious groups).
(1) Religious leaders stressing that decades or centuries of doctrines in their traditions have (hint, hint) strong implications for public debates on issues ranging from abortion to the environment, from economic justice to systematic racism. This happens a lot on left and right.
(2) Pastors invite political candidates to attend services and wave at the congregation, after noting that they invited the other candidate to attend, but they didn’t show up (hint, hint).
(3) Pastors inviting political candidates to speak to their congregations about why they need to get out and vote and, by the way, “We’re in this together” or words to this affect. Very similar: Clergy make remarks of this kind about a candidate — he or she is “one of us” — who is not present.
(4) Clergy openly endorsing candidates by name or attacking other candidates by name, in order to point the faithful in the opposite direction. This is the slam-dunk scenario.
Yes, there are scenarios that blur the lines between these four basic kinds of events.
What are readers to make of the logic seen in headlines such as these?
* Herschel Walker cites his ‘redemption’ story, focuses on White evangelical Christians — The Washington Post
* Black faith leaders in Georgia speak out against Herschel Walker — The New York Times
Want to put these events into one of my four camps, as listed above?
How about this one? I just received a public-relations email boosting this candidate in Texas. It contained a link to the “sermon” featured at the top of this post. Here is a Twitter link for some of this material.
Rep. James Talarico had lots of things to say and here are a few samples of the language:
“This summer, more than half our population became second-class citizens. Every one of our neighbors with a uterus became the property of the State. And nothing is more un-Christian.” [...]
“The only way we can allow an embryo’s rights to trump a woman’s rights is if we believe a woman is not a full person—which has been the default belief for most of human history.”
More:
“Being Christian and being pro-choice are absolutely consistent because Christianity is a feminist religion.” [...]
“When a mob of men threatened to stone a woman for adultery, Jesus called out their hypocrisy. When a bleeding woman begged for help in a bustling crowd, Jesus stopped to heal her. When a young woman wanted to do theology instead of housework, Jesus honored her choice.” [...]
“Jesus famously summed up his teachings into two commandments: love God and love neighbor.
Final quote:
That's why we have a separation of church and state — no government can keep you from expressing your religion or force you to express theirs. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t talk about our faith. [...]
For too long, pro-choice Christians have allowed anti-choice Christians to take over our faith and our country. On this Sunday before Election Day, we must speak up.
Were these remarks, in a church service, a violation of the Johnson Amendment? Why or why not?
Be careful out there. Once again, there are important issues here on the Religious Right and the Religious Left. It is possible — especially for journalists — to be concerned about both.
FIRST IMAGE: Uncredited graphic with feature entitled “Do You Know the Risks of Church Political Activity?” at the PayrollPartners.com website.