Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Quote of the Day: Did You Leave Your Religious Community Because It ‘Left’ You?
“The church is not partisan. The Catholic Church is probably a great example of a church that offends both Democrats and Republicans alike.” – – Rev. David Boettner, rector of the cathedral and vicar general of the Diocese of Knoxville, Tennessee.
My heart goes out to all those church and synagogue leaders who try to lead their communities and congregations with integrity and honor. Too often, some of them go far beyond the content that they should be sharing with their members. What drives a religious leader to indulge (and I do mean to use that word) in spreading political positions? Have they considered the implications of acting in this way? I’ve come to my own conclusions.
First, I think there are some leaders who are simply zealots, which I think primarily describes the far Left. They think they are correct in their beliefs, and those people who believe otherwise are terribly misguided at best, or evil at worst. These are the spiritual leaders who are supposed to bring their members to a closer relationship with G-d and each other, but they are certain to offend at least a percentage of their community that believes that church sermons should be politics-free or shouldn’t denigrate their own political views. Preaching politics from the pulpit is arrogant, thoughtless, and inconsiderate; if a religious leader can’t keep his views to himself, he doesn’t belong at the pulpit.
Another reason for religious leaders preaching politics is because they don’t know how to clarify for themselves and their community the reasons for not speaking on politics, but they are also afraid to be disliked or rejected (particularly if a group within the community disagrees with their positions). One aspect of being a religious leader (it would seem to me) is to demonstrate courage in the face of adversity. That means that you may preach on inclusiveness and tolerance, but you won’t voice a political agenda.
There is also the issue of people who want their religious leader to take a public position on politics; in other words, they are trying to coerce them to “speak to their side.” Religious leaders are certainly entitled to their own views, but they are out of line to take public positions on specific political ideas. If their congregants reject that decision to remain neutral, they can simply look for a new church.
Another issue is that people say they want their pastor to help them relate the bible to their own lives. An excellent way to do this is for the pastor not to list off a palette of views, but instead to ask questions of his members, explaining that it is their challenge and responsibility to answer those questions for themselves, as they relate their lives to the words of the Bible.
There are other rationales we can give for preaching politics, and I encourage you to list them in your comments. But I think it’s also helpful to look at the restrictions that the Internal Revenue Service has enacted:
What political activities are prohibited under the Internal Revenue Code?
Religious organizations, as well as all other organizations exempt from federal income tax under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, are prohibited from participating or intervening, directly or indirectly, in a 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 campaign intervention, including 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 campaign intervention of a sort that reflects bias for or against any candidate, political party or PAC, such as distributing biased voter education materials or conducting a biased candidate forum or voter registration drive.
Must religious organizations restrict their discussion of issues during election campaign periods?
No. The political campaign intervention prohibition does not restrict discussions of issues that are not linked to support for or opposition to candidates. The fact that candidates may align themselves on one side or another of an issue does not restrict the ability of religious organizations to engage in discussions of that issue. That said, a religious organization may nonetheless violate the political campaign intervention prohibition if it communicates preferences for or against particular candidates as part of its issue discussions.
What is the likelihood that a religious leader will be able to be objective, and not take sides, in these types of discussions? Why allow for discussions that are not faith-related and are likely to create conflict within the community?
What conclusions do you draw from these thoughts I’ve shared?
My advice: don’t preach politics from the pulpit.
Published in General
Doug, I think this part of the code is just another effort of the IRS flexing its muscles over organizations that they think are conservative politically. I would be very surprised to see them acting against a church that speaks on Democrat issues.
It’s one thing to leave a parish. It’s another to leave “the” church started by Jesus Christ. That’s something I could never do.
I can handle people following their own agendas. When I looked into it, there seemed to be a large amount of local Church’s people that supported it and the priests’ management structure seemed to be quietly supporting it while public remaining quiet. At which time it seemed that this and most of the Left’s agenda was incorporated into the Church’s agenda. It was then I came to the conclusion (after many suggested that the Church was no longer for knuckle dragging racist such as my self and moved on.
Sure you can. When the Church no longer represents your understanding to what Jesus Christ taught / represents then they left you and you no longer support them.
When our priest spoke against homosexuality and same sex marriage in his homily, I saw two women get up and leave. Whether or not they left the Church itself, I do not know. But there are many who ‘church-shop’ in order to find one that fits their own beliefs – as if they were God, and the world should revolve around their desires.
She is single and doesn’t care about the seating arrangements, but women participate and are “counted” there and she appreciates being an active and appreciated part of the congregation. As long as she buttons her mouth. That gets tiresome. I think she’ll eventually leave, though her family situation (she’s a convert) and location (too far to walk) are a problem. Mentally and spiritually, she’s pretty much out of there. The rest is, as you know, a really big step.
The fault was with the gay priest dissenting from Church teaching, not the Church. I would not leave the Eucharist because of a flawed priest.
Exactly. Change parishes and report the heretic to the bishop. This is why Jesus made his church hierarchical. Priests don’t get to change church teaching.
I don’t think that this is true.
I do think that this attitude has been a major contributor to the decline in Christianity and morality in our country.
You’re right – many people “church-shop” in order to feel that their individual opinions have divine sanction. It is a way of escaping the demands that an orthodox (small “o”) faith puts on us. Which reminds me of Chesterton’s quote: “We do not want a Church that will move with the world. We want a Church that will move the world.”
My previous parish had a priest who was quite blunt. If people didn’t want to hear Church teaching, his attitude was, don’t let the door hit you on the way out. When he first arrived, many people did leave. But many more flocked to him because they wanted to hear the truth fearlessly expressed. We had over 80 zipcodes represented in that parish (I know because I helped put together the directory) because people drove from all over.
I’m always inspired by people who are committed to seeking out the truth and the Truth. Thanks, Jean.
There are a number of ways to interpret that. None of them seems to green-light Drag Queen Story Time.
But that might just be me.
We resigned our membership in our previous Protestant denomination because the agenda for the regional and national denominational meetings and organizational goals became indistinguishable from what would be at a political action committee or a secular social service organization. Politics, not faith, drove the organization’s functions and positions. Any residual scriptural or historical justification for those political positions were flimsy and based on very superficial analyses. Many others left that denomination at the same time we did, or soon thereafter, and those who remained expressed great joy, as they were now even freer to follow the latest cultural trends to become “more relevant” without those pesky old-fashioned people insisting that scripture should be the church’s primary reference document, and that church history might have some relevant teaching.
Although we resigned membership in the denomination, we continued to worship with the local congregation because the pastors and other congregational leaders had not (yet) gone nuts themselves. But after an associate pastor was elevated to co-pastor, the local preaching also became more politics-centric, and less God and Christ centric. And there was less tolerance for those of us whose reading of Scripture and church history led us to a political position different from that espoused by the pastors. So we left the local congregation too.
I’m sorry to hear about your experience. It can be so difficult to find a community that works for you, and when that community makes poor choices, they force you to go through that process again. Did you eventually find a community that met your needs, FST?
We could not in that geographic area. But about a year later I was involuntarily retired from my job and we moved in accordance with our retirement plans (that we thought were longer term, but so be it!). Because of our experience with the disintegration of our previous denomination, we were determined not to join another denominational church. But after moving, one of the strongest congregations in town was (is) another denominational church with a very God-centric pastor. Unfortunately, this denomination is now headed for a split over a number of issues. But I think this split is likely to be more dignified than the disintegration of the other denomination, and I think this local congregation will find a way to thrive after the split. This pastor is very good at building a God oriented scripture based foundation before we start applying the principles to politics or elsewhere. By the time a solid foundation is built, it is easier for everyone to handle differences in how we might apply those principles to specifics of our daily life.
You sound very hopeful. I wish your community success in working through its issues, FST. G-d Bless.
I was raised by atheists and started going to church in March and a big reason it’s stuck with my church is that the pastors all focus on the Bible, God and have yet to take a political stand on anything. The closest they’ll get is to gently admonish both sides that they are deeply flawed and deeply loved by their Creator.
And there are no real references to current trends (at least in the congregation … the small groups it gets a little different). I absolutely love it. It’s exactly what I hoped for in a church.
It’s also very small, non-denominational church … and I wonder if that plays a role? It doesn’t have to pay attention to politics because it’s too small in its congregation, but also not aligned to a big “bureaucratic” entity? I don’t know, but I love it.
I haven’t finished reading all the comments, but I’ll just say yes. I did leave my church and my Christian denomination after years of having left-wing politics infused into sermons, supported with financial resources, and celebrated in banners hung outside the church building.
I’m so happy for you, Bill. That’s wonderful.
I’m happy for you that you found a place that suits you, but I must admit that I believe there are moral issues that religious leaders should teach about, no matter if they are also contentious political matters. Many people here on Ricochet dump on elected Republicans all the time for their alleged lack of spine, but we all have opportunities and occasions to exhibit some spine ourselves. Insulating our religious life from our public and political life seems cowardly to me, and I expect better from religious leaders. And no, I don’t think the positions a church might take on a moral and political position has anything to do with bureaucracy, but has more to do with what they regard as principles. “Thou shalt not murder” is a pretty basic principle to honor, for example. How does a religious leader ignore the prevalence of abortion or be unmoved by it, given that commandment?
Neither eternal salvation nor American renewal will come through politics. Preach the religion straight, and people should be able to infer the politics on their own,
I have left two Churches because they abandoned the Gospel and preached left wing politics. I really didn’t care that most of the congregation was of the left — I didn’t care about their politics, I just wanted the religion, the Gospel, preached straight. At both Churches, new head pastors took over who thought left wing politics WAS the Gospel.
You can preach against abortion, and that marriage is between a man and a woman, without commenting on elections or political parties.
I agree with your first statement, obviously, and I think American renewal, if it happens, comes through a renewal of culture, not through politics, though those two do become entwined.
I’m Catholic, and therefore do not regard priests as disinterested preachers but as shepherds. I don’t think a caring shepherd leaves his flock without guidance, trusting that they’ll come to the right conclusions on their own, especially in a toxic culture. He’s supposed to provide care and guidance.
True to a point – many states have had and are going to have elections where issues such as SSM have been on the ballot. Looking ahead, many states are going to be putting abortion questions on the ballot. I think religious leaders should be speaking very directly about these elections.
I’m Catholic. I agree with that opening quote by Rev. David Boettner. The Catholic Church tries very hard to be politically neutral, even though in my opinion they should be favoring the right on the political spectrum. They lean over backwards to try to appease the left. I would never leave the Catholic Church because it’s the truth. Silly bishops, corrupt priests, and even a flawed Pope makes no difference. Every religion has similar leadership because the leaders of every religion are human and prone to sin and mistakes. The faith is the faith. The sacraments are the sacraments. And you can only get them in the Catholic Church.
Nah, my religious community kicked me out because I broke the rules and wasn’t a powerful US Senator.
As a Catholic, it wasn’t “left” that made it want to leave, it was the sex scandal and cover up.
I’m sorry to hear this. The Catholic Church survives, and will continue to survive, despite the sinfulness of Her members. The Church holds the fullness of Truth – why abandon that? Isn’t it better to stay and fight? As a Catholic you must know that outside the Church there is no salvation.
The key is “in my lifetime.” I am engaged in the struggle that may finally see success in the adulthood of my grandkids.