Must we Protest to Protect our Freedom to Proclaim?

Pastor and theologian Wayne Grudem defends the freedom that the church should not be prohibited from endorsing one candidate over another:

• This Sunday I have agreed to join nearly 1,500 pastors nationwide and participate in Pulpit Freedom Sunday [PFS], sponsored by Alliance Defending Freedom…This action is in violation of the 1954 "Johnson Amendment" to the Internal Revenue Code, which prohibits tax-exempt organizations like churches from endorsing any candidate by name. But in our nation, a higher law than the IRS code is the Constitution, which forbids laws "abridging freedom of speech" or "prohibiting the free exercise" of religion (First Amendment).

I agree with Grudem that this “Johnson Amendment” [JA] constitutes a violation of the First Amendment, which guarantees the free exercise of religion. JA needlessly limits the freedom to speak from the pulpit. I was therefore surprised that many Christians disagreed with Grudem in the comment section. Here are two typical responses:

• If you are to lose your tax exempt status, let it be for preaching the Gospel instead of breaking a law that has nothing to do with it. 

• As a pastor I preach the Gospel at church. It isn't that I'm afraid to go to jail or lose our church's tax exemption. It’s that if I'm going to go to jail, I want it to be for preaching Christ crucified and risen again for the forgiveness of sins.

Because these objections are so frequently cited, I thought it important to facilitate the dialogue with my defense of PFS:

1. The JA violates our First Amendment guarantee against governmental encroachment.

2. The JA sets a dangerous precedent. If it stands, it declares that the government has the right to limit the freedom of the church to preach as it would.

3. These comments draw a sharp and questionable distinction between preaching the Gospel and opposing a political candidate. Such a distinction would prevent the church from preaching against a Stalin or a Hitler – two people who silenced the Gospel and slaughtered Christians.

4. Perhaps we have a truncated understanding of the Gospel. Instead, I think that we glorify the Gospel when we demonstrate its relevance to all areas of life – feeding the poor, slavery, segregation, and various forms of injustice, including threats to the freedom of religion.

5. When we fail to apply the Gospel to the ills of society, we show its irrelevance, and bring down contempt upon the church. While atheists deplore our involvement in the political process, they also castigate the church for not being more involved – think segregation or the rise of National Socialism.

6. Our tax-exempt status shouldn’t be regarded as a privilege but a right. The State has no right taxing the church. Once the State has this power, there remains nothing to limit how much the State could tax the church. It could even tax the church out of its property.

We live at a time when many of our rights are being challenged. I therefore think that we have to get on with our discussion!

The Rise of Secularism, Permissiveness and the Death of a Great Civilization

What impact has secularism, the permissiveness it has spawned, and the corresponding marginalization of Christianity had on our society? What has happened to the USA since the landmark Supreme Court decisions in 1962 and 1963 to remove prayer from the schools? Theologian Wayne Grudem observes:

• Once that happened, then, by implication, other decisions began to prohibit teachers from expressing belief in God at all or expressing their belief that there were moral standards that came from God and should be followed. Once such changes in the public in the public schools began to take effect, crime and other destructive forces in society began to increase year after year. (Politics According to the Bible, 505).

Grudem cites To Pray or Not to Pray by David Barton:

• Barton documents the dramatic rise in teen pregnancy rates, teen suicides, and drug abuse since prayer was removed from public schools. (506)

These, however, aren’t the only costs associated with the banishment of the Christian faith from the public arena? According to Fox News:

• In mid-January, the Pew Research Center told us 72% of all adults ages 18 and older were married in 1960; but today just 51% are—a record low.

The fallout from this fact is proving catastrophic:

• Then the new book, “Coming Apart: The State of White America 1960-2010,” by Charles Murray, says that a retreat from marriage among the white working class is a key factor in the growing economic divide in America.

• “Coming Apart” cites statistics from a theoretical upper-middle class town, showing 99% of children lived with both biological parents in 1962 and 84% of children did so in 2004

• Admittedly that’s a drop, but nothing compared to the theoretical white working class town where 96% of children lived with both parents in 1962 yet only 37% did so in 2004.

Well, what’s the matter with our creative, fluid, blended families?

• Research is overwhelming on the fact that this disadvantages children on an enormous scale—think increased teen pregnancies, increased prison populations, and children who grow up with no modeling for how to attain healthy marriage in the next generation.

• The Institute for American Values reports that 40 percent of all American babies are born outside of marriage today, and taxpayers spend at least $112 billion a year for divorce and unwed childbearing.

• The National Center on African American Marriages and Parenting reports that 72 percent of all African-American babies are born outside of marriage. The vast majority of men in prison are from fatherless homes. We can’t build prisons fast enough—prison population has jumped from 300,000 to 2.3 million in 3.5 decades.

This looks like the demise of a once great – perhaps the greatest – society. Why aren’t our politicians sounding the alarm? Why aren’t we returning to the principles that have made the West great? And why do we continue to reject these principles with ever-increasing alacrity?

The human race has proved itself stubborn and notoriously blind. God had given Israel everything, but this failed to induce Israel to reciprocate. Instead, they pursued the religions and lifestyles of their neighbors to their detriment. Nevertheless, their God continued to pursue and plead with them:

·        Go [Jeremiah], proclaim this message toward the north: "Return, faithless Israel,” declares the Lord, “I will frown on you no longer, for I am merciful,' declares the Lord, “I will not be angry forever. Only acknowledge your guilt-- you have rebelled against the Lord your God, you have scattered your favors to foreign gods under every spreading tree, and have not obeyed me," declares the Lord. (Jeremiah 3:12-13)

Will we return?

(Take a look at the video of Planned Parenthood's role in the growing decay.)