Pastors Can’t Opine Politically? – What Does This Mean?

Yes, we certainly can. This incenses the enemies of the church, who find their god in the authority of the state instead. Sadly, every election season, this comes up. There are precious few limitations on how or when pastors may exercise our liberties both within and outside the pastoral office. (“Office” here means vocation, job, or duty, rather than the place where my books live).

Rev. Dr. Christopher Thoma, senior pastor of Our Savior Evangelical Lutheran Church, Hartland, Michigan holds an annual conference called the Body of Christ in the Public Square. He’s hosted speakers in the ten or so years he’s been holding the conference at Our Savior including: Ben Shapiro, Matt Walsh, Candace Owens, Riley Gaines, Ben Carson, Jack Phillips, and Rev. Dr. Jamison Hardy (fmr. President of the English District – LCMS, and current president of the LCMS Concordia University System). That’s not exactly a balanced list of speakers.

Rev. Thoma recently posted this in public (published with permission):

“Considering a particular jab following worship today — one suggesting my political preferences “might be too visible to the public” — I’m just going to put this image right here. [the image: Rev. Thoma with a political yard sign] Let there be no “might be” regarding my predilections. [He doesn’t conceal his political opinions]. In addition to the image, I’ll share a summary of the Johnson Amendment (since it was mentioned in passing) that I wrote a few years ago. I share it not necessarily to claim my rights above the need for expressing Christian love in such conversations (which I certainly attempt to do), but rather so that others are not confused with regard to a clergyman-citizen’s actual freedoms. Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod leadership, pastors, and parishioners would do well to take note.”

Rev. Thoma’s post from a few years ago (ibid):

“Of course as a Lutheran pastor, I’m probably not going to say from the pulpit, “Vote for so-and-so!” At its heart, that’s not the task of preaching. Although I’ll admit that in this day and age, it’s becoming more and more likely that such a phrase might actually be necessary homiletically.

Babies are being murdered. The freedom to preach and proclaim the Gospel is being smothered. The twisting of Natural Law in ways that disintegrate the family while adulterating God’s design in holy marriage are actual planks in political party platforms. Too many Christians sitting in the pews are choosing to elect leaders who support these diabolical things, even as the Word of God speaks against them.

[We can certainly now add to this list: Critical Race Theory, distorting God’s forgiveness; and trans ideology, distorting God’s gift of gender.]

With this, it should be no surprise if a pastor does what he can from the pulpit to aim his flock toward candidates who are most aligned with the will of God and not the will of devilry. But either way, whether saying “Vote for so-and-so” seems appropriate or not, if a pastor wanted to say it from the pulpit, according to the law he could. He is free to preach and teach as he chooses, even if particular parties or candidates are promoted. Admittedly, as the efforts of a pastor and church (a non-profit religious organization) might meet with the Johnson Amendment’s particulars, there are certain things they cannot do. For the sake of clarity, here’s the best summary I can offer of the law in this regard.

Firstly, the Amendment states that a non-profit religious organization may not endorse or oppose a particular candidate in a way that results in the imposition of punitive action against members of the organization who endorse or oppose a different candidate, contribute to or use a church’s resources for the benefit of one candidate over another. This typically happens when one particular candidate or party is granted open access to a church’s membership roster. [(RR 2007-41, p. 11, Situation 18)]

Secondly, a non-profit religious organization may perform such activities as register their members as voters, distribute non-partisan voting guides, invite candidates to speak, directly address issues and legislation (abortion, marriage, and the like), even employing the church’s resources to move for or against these issues. Preaching is not excluded. [(RR 2007-41, p. 3-4, Situations 1-2)]

Thirdly, as an individual, the pastor or religious leader of a non-profit religious organization may do whatever he or she feels led to do within his or her station —which includes but is not limited to publicly endorsing a candidate, supporting (or encouraging support toward) a party or campaign, and the like, as long as the efforts are not done using the church’s material resources. There are no limitations on the pastors as individuals serving in their offices. The few limitations above that do exist are only for the religious entity as a whole and only if the religious entity is a non-profit organization.” [(RR 2007-41, p. 10-11)]

Rev. Thoma didn’t and the IRS barely addresses the parsonage. So, I’ll add for your benefit:

Fourthly, the pastor’s home, a parsonage, is in his possession and not a material asset of the church, as explained by the Treasurer’s office of the Texas District – LCMS. The parsonage is a taxable portion of the pastor’s pay. The benefit is limited in scope. Pastor only has exclusive use of it, while he is serving. But, during the term of the benefit, the church does not have possession of it. The church may not place signage at the parsonage, nor use it uninvited.

“Charities, including churches, placing signs on their property that show they support a particular candidate.” (IR-2006-36) Without access to do so, neither the church nor her agents acting in their office, have placed nor can place anything on the parsonage yard. The pastor is a resident, when he is at home, and not acting from his office.

Despite their volumes of guidance, the IRS rarely, if ever enforces their rules concerning the unclear letter of the law in the Johnson Amendment. It is impossible to prove a negative. As such, in the absence of a clear directive defining the situation of a parsonage, none of the other criteria apply.

Concerning the Johnson Amendment on it’s own merits, the law is probably on thin ice. It was introduced in retribution against two Texas non-profits that supported LBJ’s primary opponent. The Johnson Amendment stands contrary to the free exercise clause of the first amendment (American Center for Law and Justice). “Congress shall make no law”… except the Johnson Amendment.

Dear Christians, exercise your 4^th Commandment duty — register & vote!

Rev. Jason M. Kaspar
Sole Pastor
Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church & Preschool
La Grange, TX