Pastor, Please Don't Endorse a Candidate
The IRS may have changed its stance. But you shouldn't. Here's why.
I didn’t anticipate writing this post, but the news of the IRS changing its position regarding churches and the endorsement of political candidates seemed pressing. I will be the first to admit that there may be exceptions to what I wrote below, but, generally speaking, I think it will be the best path forward for pastors and churches.—Steve
Late yesterday, news broke that the IRS was reversing its decades-old position prohibiting pastors from endorsing candidates from the pulpit. On one hand, I celebrate the fact that the government is removing itself from what clergy may and may not say. That’s a good thing, in my mind.
That being said, I think the IRS rule change is going to create a massive mess for clergy and churches. Just a few issues on the horizon:
I imagine churches/pastors will become the targets of Political Action Committees (PACs) and political donors (particularly in tight elections). Think about this: Elections in battleground states are razor thin. Politicians raise enormous amounts of money in order to flood the airwaves and social media with ads. If pastors can now endorse candidates, I imagine PACs will approach pastors/churches and offer significant “donations” to the church if the pastor will officially endorse a candidate from the pulpit. Will those donations come with other stipulations? Will churches become dependent upon PAC donations? Will future donations be tied to the support of questionable policies? Do we really want the influence of secular political PACs on the pulpits of churches across America? This will not open politicians to religious influence. It opens congregations and pastors to political influence. We need pastors—not influencers—in our pulpits, and this will push pastors even further towards being an influencer.
This change will likely be used to lobby for the taxation of churches—and you really don’t want that. I know many of my atheist/non-religious friends will initially disagree, but hear me out: If churches can be taxed, then they can be lobbied on the basis of having taxes raised and lowered. That creates a nihilistic political reality that benefits no one and makes absolute terrible bedfellows of politicians and churches. Beyond that, most churches are very small and would likely be forced to close if they had to pay taxes, and the government has no plan on how to replace the community services most churches provide. I am convinced taxing churches would be a net negative.
Endorsing candidates from the pulpit will only serve to divide local churches. I can only speak intelligently about the churches I have pastored, but none of those churches were politically homogenous. The most recent church I pastored was in Houston and certainly contained members across the political spectrum. To have officially endorsed a candidate from the pulpit would have divided the church and many members would have left. I learned this first hand many years ago. I invited a local politician to the congregation to share his faith story. He went off script and started spouting talking points. I got all sorts of emails…and all sorts of families left the church. Bottom line: Churches are one of the few remaining spaces where people of different ideologies come together in voluntary community and making the church an explicitly political zone will push out those who have different political perspectives.
Endorsing a candidate may seem like a good idea…until it suddenly doesn’t. How long before the candidate you endorse does something that is in opposition to the commands of Jesus? Given the state of modern politics, I’d guess less than a week. When that happens, we confuse those who trust clergy to hear from God.
Pastors don’t need the added pressure of being asked to endorse a candidate. I know this to be case, because I faced such pressure prior to this change by the IRS. It will be problematic enough with PACs potentially bringing outside influence on churches through donations, but if pastors have significant members on opposing sides of the political divide pressuring them to endorse different candidates, there is not a winning scenario for the pastor. Trust me, pastoring is stressful enough as it is without pressuring clergy to choose which candidate to endorse, much less choosing between church members.
Despite what you may have heard, there are faithful Christians in both major political parties. I know, I know. You’ve heard this message from me before. But I think it’s important to say it again. I’m seeing folks on the right saying that Democrats are “godless secularists” and folks on the left saying that Republicans are “religious hypocrites.” Good times. Yes, I’m sure there are enough godless secularists and religious hypocrites to go around. But I know faithful believers in both parties. My Democrat friends are Democrats because they care deeply about things like care for the poor, and they believe that Jesus commanded his followers to care about those things. My Republican friends are Republicans because they care deeply about things like reducing abortions and standing for traditional sexual ethics, and they believe that Jesus commanded his followers to care about such things. Oddly enough, I think they are both right, and I think Christians would do well to realize that Republicans should care more about the poor and Democrats should care more about ethics surrounding sexuality. If you think your political party is always right on every issue, then you are either woefully misinformed or (sadly) a willful partisan hack.
Churches are members of a different Kingdom and should behave as such. Are politics important? Absolutely. Should Christians be involved? Yes. But let’s maintain the prophetic voice of the church by talking about specific issues from a Christian perspective, not by selling out to a candidate or party. Our best tools are preaching the truth of Scripture over against the issues of the time rather than promoting a candidate. It’s far more effective to promote the Way of Jesus. And let’s be honest, if endorsements are allowed, if pastors speak prophetically on a topic, then it will likely be construed as an endorsement of whatever party or candidate support that particular stance—even if it was never meant to do so. (More on that here.)
Bottom line: I see this as a great danger for pastors and churches. I can see no upside to endorsing a candidate in most situations. Will there be exceptions? Certainly. But, in general, I believe pastors should stay out of the endorsement game and double down on Jesus instead.