Pulpit Freedom Sunday

Today, Oct. 5, is being observed by some conservative Protestant pastors and churches as “Pulpit Freedom Sunday” (PFS). Since 2008, a number of preachers across the country have participated in PFS, giving partisan political endorsements in their sermons.

These pastors are willing to defy the law in order to defend their right to freedom of speech—and to promote political positions and candidates that they think are biblically correct.

Since 1954, tax-exempt religious organizations have been barred from endorsing parties or candidates. The new U.S. tax code enacted then is sometimes referred to as the Johnson Amendment, as it was first proposed by then-Senator Lyndon B. Johnson.

The Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) was founded in 1994 by Bill Bright, James Dobson, D. James Kennedy, and Donald Wildmon (not to be confused with Thinking Friend Donald Wideman), among a number of other conservative Christian leaders.

In 2012, the ADF changed its name to Alliance Defending Freedom, but both before and after the name change ADF has been a leader among Christians organizations opposing the Johnson Amendment and advocating PFS as “a strategic litigation plan.”

Through “tactical lawsuits” against the IRS, the ADF says they are seeking “to restore the right of each pastor to speak scriptural Truth from the pulpit about moral, social, and governmental issues.”

They eagerly desire for each pastor to be able to speak freely from the pulpit “without fear of losing his [sic] church’s tax-exempt status.” (These quotes are from this website.)

The ADF claims the Johnson Amendment is an unconstitutional restriction of legitimate Christian discourse and a violation of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech.

The same website gives the names and location of the 1,225 churches across the nation that observed PFS last year, down considerably from the 1,620 churches that participated in 2012. That decrease was partly due to a lawsuit.

In November 2012 the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) filed a lawsuit over conservative preachers openly defying those restrictions. (View that document here.)

That lawsuit was settled in July of this year. The FFRF claimed victory, as the IRS has now instituted a protocol for investigating tax-exempt churches and religious organizations involved in political activity.

This has not deterred the ADF from actively promoting PFS—and some 1,500 churches are expected to participate today.

Matt Barber, vice president of Liberty Counsel Action (LCA), spoke about PFS at the June 2014 Faith & Freedom Coalition's "Road to Majority" conference in Washington, D.C.

Thousands of pastors, Barber noted, have disobeyed the IRS law in acts of civil disobedience on Pulpit Freedom Sunday. LCA, headed by Mathew Staver, dean of Liberty University School of Law, wants the IRS to take punitive action so that they can challenge the law in courts.

Presently, all 50 states and the District of Columbia exempt churches from paying property tax. Moreover, donations to churches are tax-deductible. In stark contrast to ADF, LCA and other such groups, though, there are others who are asking if such tax exemptions are actually contrary to separation of church and state. That may well be the case.

So what is really at stake on this Pulpit Freedom Sunday is not the freedom to speak, but the freedom not to pay taxes, which may be questioned under the best of conditions. At present, if churches are willing to give up their tax exempt status, their pastors are completely freely to say what they want from their pulpits.

That is probably sufficient freedom—for today and for every Sunday.

Happy 90th Birthday, Jimmy!

The 39th President of the United States was born on October 1, 1924, so tomorrow is Jimmy Carter’s 90th birthday.

In spite of the many difficulties and widespread criticism during his presidency, he is the best ex-president the U.S. has ever had in terms of public service and contributions to world peace and justice.

It was fitting that he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002. And it is fitting that we, too, celebrate his birthday.

Carter was a one-term president, embarrassingly defeated by Ronald Reagan in 1980.

His defeat was due to many factors, such as rampant inflation that caused grave financial problems in the country, 53 Americans taken hostage in Iran and held for more than a year, and loss of support by the Religious Right.

Still, the Camp David Accords, a peace treaty between Israel and Egypt, in September 1978 were a tremendous accomplishment.

Egyptian President Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Begin won the 1978 Nobel Peace Prize for those accords, but the agreement came about only because of Carter's indefatigable efforts.

It can be argued, though, that the biggest mistake Carter made while in the White House was his support of the Shah of Iran.

On New Year’s Eve in 1977, President Carter toasted the Shah at a state dinner in Tehran, calling him "an island of stability" in the troubled Middle East.

Just over one year later, the Shah fled his country because of the Iranian Revolution, and in February 1979 Ayatollah Khomeini returned after 14 years in exile.

Then, in November 1979, students in the Iranian Revolution overran the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and took 53 hostages who were not released until the minute after President Reagan was inaugurated in 1981.

The Iranians didn’t forget Carter’s support of the Shah.

Since his presidency, Carter has authored numerous books. One of his most important, and most criticized, is “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid” (2007).

Many strong supporters of Israel have been quite critical of that book. But in it Carter quite convincingly argues that the Palestinians have been mistreated greatly over the past 60 years.

It is a book that still needs to be widely read and seriously considered.

The documentary film “Jimmy Carter: Man from Plains” (2007) is mostly about Carter’s book tour following the publication of “Palestine” and about the controversy surrounding it.

Carter’s latest book, published earlier this year, is “A Call to Action: Women, Religion, Violence, and Power.” He writes in the introduction that “the most serious and unaddressed worldwide challenge is the deprivation and abuse of women and girls.”

Carter’s commitment to human rights and justice was a highly commendable aspect of his presidency, and he has continued that emphasis in all these years since he left office more than three decades ago.

The third chapter in Carter’s new book is “The Bible and Gender Equality.” It is a strong statement about how the Bible, rightly interpreted, supports the equality of men and women.

He also explains in this chapter how that issue is one of the main reasons he left the Southern Baptist Convention.

In most ways, Jimmy Carter is a rather “common” man. But he has had a remarkable life and has made great contributions to the world, both as the President of the United States and as a very active ex-president.

So regardless of your political position and your evaluation of Carter’s presidency, please join me in exclaiming, “Happy 90th Birthday, Jimmy!”

Cherry Picking

Earlier this month I received an email from a Thinking Friend about cherry picking. He said that he prefers “the Greatest Common Denominator” in spiritual traditions.

Then he wrote, “Does this make a ‘cherry picker’ of me? But even when I was exclusively Christian, I exercised discernment regarding the Bible, as you do. Of course I cherry pick! I want the ripe, not the unripe and rotten.”

Good point.

But is it legitimate to cherry pick when deciding which verses in the Bible, or which parts of a religion’s doctrinal statements, to accept or reject?

Cherry picking can certainly be used illegitimately. It is listed as one type of fallacious argument—and it is sometimes. But not all cherry picking is wrong or fallacious.

Consider this example.

As most of you have heard, Adrian Peterson, the star running back for the Minnesota Vikings, was indicted earlier this month on charges of reckless or negligent injury to his four-year-old son. He is accused of beating his son repeatedly.

But Peterson’s child abuse indictment has led to some people to hold up for spanking or switching children.

Corporal punishment of children has long been considered as divinely sanctioned by many conservative, “Bible-believing” Christians. After all, the Bible says, “Whoever spares the rod hates their children, / but the one who loves their children is careful to discipline them” (Proverbs 13:24, NIV).

The oft-quoted words “spare the rod and spoil the child,” though, don’t come directly from the Bible. They are from a 17^th century poem by Samuel Butler.

Still, the admonition in Proverbs is taken quite seriously by many. But what about Deuteronomy 21:18-21?

That passage says, “If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him,” they are to take him to the elders and then “all the men of his town are to stone him to death.”

Thank goodness for cherry picking!

Many other examples could be given of Bible verses that even the staunchest fundamentalists do not take seriously.

There are, however, many examples of Bible verses that fundamentalists do take literally but which “moderates” (or “liberals”) do not consider normative for contemporary Christians.

One example, of many that might be given, is 1 Corinthians 14:34, which says, “Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says” (NIV)

Is there any justification for cherry picking and downplaying that verse? And if so, what?

A person’s theological understanding is the basis for determining which Bible verses to follow and which to all but ignore.

Accordingly, as a seminary teacher I long stressed, but perhaps not strongly enough, that systematic theology is more important than biblical studies.

Sound exegesis on the basis of a thorough grasp of Hebrew and/or Greek is important—but not the most important.

Biblical study in and of itself cannot determine which verses/passages are normative. That is the job of systematic theology, formed perhaps by use of the “Wesleyan Quadrilateral.”

That unwieldy term refers to John Wesley’s methodology that said the four sources for theological development are scripture, tradition, experience and reason.

Of those four, scripture is the most, and tradition the least, important. But together they form a good basis for constructing a view of God, humankind and the world that, in turn, helps one interpret and apply the Bible correctly.

So it’s not really cherry picking after all. Rather, it’s theological understanding that guides us in affirming some Bible verses while giving little weight to others.

Honoring Sister Simone

This year’s recipient of the Pacem in Terris Peace and Freedom Award will be Sister Simone Campbell, a Catholic nun and social justice activist best known as the leader of “Nuns on the Bus.”

Sister Simone (b. 1945) is the executive director of NETWORK, a nonprofit Catholic social justice lobby based in Washington, D.C. Tomorrow (Sept. 21) she will receive the prestigious award on the campus of St. Ambrose University in Davenport, Iowa.

NETWORK, social justice lobby that she heads, was founded in 1972. In 2004, Sister Simone became its Executive Director. She was an excellent choice, for she is a remarkable woman with great credentials.

She joined the order called Sisters of Social Service in 1964, taking her final vows in 1973. Four years later she earned a law degree from the University of California, Davis.

In the 1980s as she led the Community Law Center in Oakland, Calif., which she founded in 1978, she also began practicing Zen.

It is a bit hard to get one’s head around the idea of a Catholic nun who practices both law and Zen!

Sister Simone and her organization were relentless supporters of healthcare reform in 2009-10 despite the bishops’ warning that the bill would provide government funding for abortion.

She writes of how thrilled she was to be in the gallery when the House voted to adopt the Affordable Care Act (ACA), colloquially called Obamacare.

“That last one,” she writes in her book A Nun on the Bus (2014), “is a label I think the president will wear proudly, though his opponents used it as an epithet” (p. 93).

In April 2012, though, NETWORK was indirectly censured by the Vatican.

The reprimand was of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR), the umbrella organization under which NETWORK operates. But NETWORK seemed to be the LCWR-affiliate that caused the most concern for the Vatican.

By that time they were widely known for their Nuns on the Bus tour that occurred in June and the beginning of July in 2010. Their purpose was to appeal for economic justice and to oppose the “Romney-Ryan budget” that gutted funding for safety-net programs.

Because of Sister Simone’s support of Obamacare and her leading the 2012 bus tour, she was given six minutes to speak at the Democratic National Convention in Sept. 2012. You can see her deliver that speech here.

Last year, Rep. Nancy Pelosi wrote this about Sister Simone for Politico:

If there’s a single phrase to describe Sister Simone, it is “compassionate conviction.” With bravery, with courage, with optimism, she is focused on the common good. She is a champion for the cause of peace and justice. She has the will and the drive to do right.

Rep. Pelosi’s essay is part of a series in which dozens of women reveal what women they most admire. You can find the complete article here.

Last month June and I heard Sister Simone speak in Kansas City, and we were highly impressed with her. She has a most winsome stage presence and exhibits a good balance of self-confidence and humility.

We are also impressed that last year she led a second bus tour, appealing for immigration reform, and this month she and other Sisters started on a third bus tour, this time standing up against the Koch brothers and “big money” political donations. (Read about that here.)

In spite of all her political activities, Sister Simone remains a faithful Christian. Repeatedly, she writes, “Come, Holy Spirit,” and she refers to those words as her mantra (p. 91).

It is a joy to join with many others in honoring Sister Simone for what she has done and continues to do.