Mass challenge to controversial rule banning candidate endorsements
by Bob Unruh
Preaching
about scriptural principles and applying them to the positions of
candidates for public office is not “political” speech, it’s “core
religious expression from a spiritual leader to his congregants.”
That’s according to Erik Stanley, senior legal counsel with the Alliance Defending Freedom, which reported today that nearly 1,600 pastors of churches across the nation participated in its Pulpit Initiative this past weekend.
The pastors deliberately applied biblical perspectives to the positions of candidates for public office in defiance of a regulation adopted by the Internal Revenue Service, the 1954 Johnson Amendment. ADF’s aim is to provoke a challenge from the IRS that would enable it file a lawsuit and defeat the regulation in court on constitutional grounds.
The Johnson Amendment bans churches and ministers from participating in, or intervening in any political campaign on behalf of, or in opposition to, any candidate for public office.
Supporters of the event, which began in 2008 with just 35 pastors, say the government simply cannot dictate to churches and ministers their sermon topics.
In a commentary at Townhall, Stanley said it was the “most successful Pulpit Freedom Sunday to date.”
He called it “an exercise in free speech that violates a flawed Internal Revenue Service rule,” insisting pastors who participated were “not engaging in a ‘political crusade.’”
What else is the IRS up to? A former Libertarian Party vice presidential candidate who says Barack Obama was unknown to him and his fellow Columbia University classmates says now the president is using the Internal Revenue Service to punish and silence him. Read it here.
“Instead, they are simply applying Scripture and theological doctrine to the positions held by the candidates running for office,” he said. “Pastors have been applying scriptural teaching to circumstances facing their congregations for centuries.
“This is not ‘political’ speech,” he said. “Rather, it’s core religious expression from a spiritual leader to his congregants. That kind of expression is at the very center of the freedom speech and religion protections in the First Amendment.”
Stanley said the issue is simple: Government cannot be allowed to condition a status, such as being tax-exempt, on the “surrender of a constitutionally protected freedom.”
Would churches, for example, be willing to give up their right to freedom from unreasonable search and seizure in exchange for tax-exempt status, or “if you want to maintain your right against cruel and unusual punishment, just give up your tax-exempt status?”
He explained that Democratic Sen. Lyndon Johnson got the amendment adopted in 1954 “with little notice as a means to silence non-profit groups that opposed his bid for re-election.”
“The government has no automatic right to the church’s money just because its pastor won’t give up his constitutionally protected right to free speech,” he said.
Pastors who participated found support and instructions at pulpitfreedom.org, and they are backed by a legal team at the Alliance Defending Freedom.
While WND was told no church ever has lost its tax-exempt status over the issue, the circumstances of such cases vary widely. There was a case handled by the American Center for Law and Justice in 2000 in which Branch Ministries of Binghamton, N.Y., had its tax-exempt status withdrawn after church officials bought full-page newspaper ads blasting Bill Clinton.
The decision was affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
The ACLJ said it believes “that this campaigning ban impermissibly infringes on the First Amendment rights of churches,” but added it is “nevertheless the current law. ”
“Consequently, churches desiring to keep their tax-exempt status must stringently adhere to it.”
The Alliance Defending Freedom contends the New York church had its “determination letter” revoked, not its “tax exempt” status. The distinction is crucial, ADF told WND, because there was basically no effect on the church from the IRS action.
ADF noted that a scholar who studied the issue extensively concluded that the Johnson Amendment “is not rooted in constitutional provisions for separation of church and state.”
“Johnson was not trying to address any constitutional issue related to separation of church and state; and he did not offer the amendment because of anything that churches had done,’” ADF said.
Pastors who participated in the special Sunday event sent recordings of their sermons to the IRS, effectively throwing down the challenge to argue the free speech of ministers in open court.
In a conference call regarding the effort, Pastor John Hagee of Cornerstone Church in San Antonio said it’s time that pastors in this country “choose truth over popularity.”
Jim Garlow, a prominent figure in the Pulpit Freedom movement, said, “We didn’t receive tax exempt status as churches because we did a swap saying we would not speak out on governmental issues.
“What the government can tax it can control, and what it can control it can kill,” he explained.
A short video about Pulpit Freedom Sunday:
http://www.wnd.com/2012/10/1600-christians-to-irs-stay-out-of-pulpit/
Churches Are Already Automatically Tax Exempt Under 508(c)(1)(A), Do Not Need 501(c)(3) Corporate Status
26 USC § 508 - Special rules with respect to
(a) New organizations must notify Secretary that they are applying for recognition of section 501(c)(3) status
Except as provided in subsection (c), an organization organized after October 9, 1969, shall not be treated as an organization described in section 501 (c)(3)—
(1) unless it has given notice to the Secretary in such manner as the Secretary may by regulations prescribe, that it is applying for recognition of such status, or
(2) for any period before the giving of such notice, if such notice is given after the time prescribed by the Secretary by regulations for giving notice under this subsection.
(b) Presumption that organizations are private foundations
Except as provided in subsection (c), any organization (including an organization in existence on October 9, 1969) which is described in section 501 (c)(3) and which does not notify the Secretary, at such time and in such manner as the Secretary may by regulations prescribe, that it is not a private foundation shall be presumed to be a private foundation.
(c) Exceptions
(1) Mandatory exceptions
Subsections (a) and (b) shall not apply to—
(A) churches, their integrated auxiliaries, and conventions or associations of churches, or
(B) any organization which is not a private foundation (as defined in section 509 (a)) and the gross receipts of which in each taxable year are normally not more than $5,000.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/508
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For reference:
26 USC § 501 - Exemption from tax on corporations, certain trusts, etc.
(a) Exemption from taxation
An organization described in subsection (c) or (d) orsection 401 (a) shall be exempt from taxation under this subtitle unless such exemption is denied under section 502 or 503.
(b) Tax on unrelated business income and certain other activities
An organization exempt from taxation under subsection (a) shall be subject to tax to the extent provided in parts II, III, and VI of this subchapter, but (notwithstanding parts II, III, and VI of this subchapter) shall be considered an organization exempt from income taxes for the purpose of any law which refers to organizations exempt from income taxes.
(c) List of exempt organizations
The following organizations are referred to in subsection (a):
(1) Any corporation organized under Act of Congress which is an instrumentality of the United States but only if such corporation—
(A) is exempt from Federal income taxes—
(i) under such Act as amended and supplemented before July 18, 1984, or
(ii) under this title without regard to any provision of law which is not contained in this title and which is not contained in a revenue Act, or
(B) is described in subsection (l).
(2) Corporations organized for the exclusive purpose of holding title to property, collecting income therefrom, and turning over the entire amount thereof, less expenses, to an organization which itself is exempt under this section. Rules similar to the rules of subparagraph (G) of paragraph (25) shall apply for purposes of this paragraph.
(3) Corporations, and any community chest, fund, or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational purposes, or to foster national or international amateur sports competition (but only if no part of its activities involve the provision of athletic facilities or equipment), or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals, no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual, no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation (except as otherwise provided in subsection (h)), and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/501
The Catholic Church knows all to well that religion and politics
mixes very easily, and they use it to their advantage. While the
Protestant Church is constrained by their greed to retain their tax
exempt status, and the Political junkies fear losing their lives in
another Inquisition if Church and State were ever to come together
again. What they don't realize is that the Catholic Church doesn't work
with any these pre-conceived ideas or constaints, and go un-noticed in
their control of our Government, and have been controlling and
manipulating this Country since its creation.
See: The Secret Terrorists (Secret Jesuit Plot to Take Over USA) http://www.scribd.com/doc/36056155/Hughes-The-Secret-Terrorists-Secret-Jesuit-Plot-to-Take-Over-USA-2002
The Enemy Unmasked http://www.scribd.com/doc/108804475/The-Enemy-Unmasked-By-Bill-Hughes
What I have noticed in years of posting news regarding the combination of politics and religion, the religious people complain that politics has no place in their religious discussions, most likely due to their fear of losing the 501(c)(3) tax exempt status that they work so hard to keep. For an example, look at the Official Seventh-day Adventist Church website regarding their Trademark Guidelines -
Seventh-day Adventist Trademark Guidelines http://www.adventist.org/beliefs/guidelines/main-guide5.html
John Brownlee 501c3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWVq0M2ab6U&feature=
When I post in political groups, they bring up the separation of Church and State argument.
Separation of church and state in the United States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States
Is 'Separation of Church & State' in the US Constitution?
http://www.examiner.com/article/is-separation-of-church-state-the-us-constitution
IRS–ROMAN CULT’S COLLECTION AGENCY
The Roman Catholic Jesuits started the international banking system
called the Illuminati and the Agentur (and blamed the Jews for this).
Rome’s motto is, “He that holds the money bags runs the nations.” The
Vatican started all the wars (inquisitions) to rid the world of heretics
(non-Roman Catholics) and then made loans from her banks to nations so
they would have enough money to fight them. We foolishly permitted
this cult’s collection agency into our country (the IRS—which answers
only to Rome).
According to God’s laws in the Bible, every fifty years there is to be a clearing of debts that can’t be paid (a relief). This is called the year of jubilee (Lev. 25:10). Let’s bump cultish Roman canon law of death and bondage and get back to God’s law and His Son, Christ Jesus. Let’s have a clearing (the year of jubilee). These debts have been instigated by Satan (the Roman Catholic cult) to hurt us and put us into financial bondage. We didn’t start these wars, we didn’t want these wars, and we didn’t borrow that money. So why should we have to suffer? These wars were all Roman Catholic inquisitions to mold the world into a one-world government, church, and media.
At the one-world church convention in Vancouver, some of our volunteers were shocked by the pro-homosexual booths and literature, pro-witchcraft booths and literature, drunkenness, and total ungodliness, which this “universal” world’s largest cult and sect exalts. These satanic people call anybody that preaches the true Word, which is separation from evil, consecration unto good –they call this a cult or a sect. But they worship this one-world organization and its cult leader, the pope...
They kneel and kiss his ring and feet and call him “holy father,” which is forbidden in the Bible. They obey his every wish. By calling us a cult, who walk in the Spirit and obey God’s every wish, they have possibly committed the unpardonable sin–blasphemy of the Holy Spirit–which is never forgiven in this world nor in the world to come (Matt. 12:31-32). But Satan does not care because he already has blasphemed the Holy Spirit.
501 (c)(3) Government Takeover of the Church http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MF4FgXpS3o&list=PLCCF8654F98136456&feature=
More: IS THE POPE THE SUPER-BOSS OF ALL GOVERNMENT'S? http://inquisitionnews.blogspot.com/2009/11/is-pope-super-boss-of-all-governments.html#links
Remember Tue Jul 7, 2009? Pope calls for a "global authority" on economy http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/07/07/us-pope-encyclical-idUSTRE5662VM20090707
Then: Given in Rome, at Saint Peter's, on 29 June, the Solemnity of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul, in the year 2009, the fifth of my Pontificate. ENCYCLICAL LETTER CARITAS IN VERITATE (Charity In Truth) is introduced to the public . http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20090629_caritas-in-veritate_en.html
ENCYCLICAL LETTER CARITAS IN VERITATE explained by ex-Catholic Priest Richard Bennett - CARITAS IN VERITATE: The Pope’s Plans on Organizing Political, Economic and Religious Activities Worldwide http://inquisitionnews.blogspot.com/p/caritas-in-veritate-popes-plans-on.html
Then: Mon Sep 21, 2009 after the pope discussed the global downturn with U.S. President Barack Obama: U.S. to push for new economic world order at G20 http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/09/21/us-g-idUSTRE58G34Z20090921
Finally, Please view this video for more on the New World Order and the Re-Distribution of the Worlds Wealth: Walter Veith - A New World Order / Total Onslaught http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BomP-eZ5lYM
The Roman Catholic Footprint is All Over this Organization [Just check the Bio's of the Staff]. If Pastor's wanted to make a STATEMENT why wait till RON PAUL, the ONLY Constitutionalist, was scammed out of the Nomination. Also, Sadly most Pastors [Even, so called Protestants] are so politically ignorant as to not know how to vet a Candidate.
A total of 1,586 pastors participated in Pulpit Freedom Sunday in all
50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. This is the fifth
annual event sponsored by Alliance Defending Freedom, a pro-life legal
group.
The registered pastors committed to preach sermons that present biblical perspectives on the positions of electoral candidates. In so doing, they exercised their constitutionally protected freedom to engage in religious expression from the pulpit despite an Internal Revenue Service rule known as the Johnson Amendment that activist groups often use to silence churches by threatening their tax-exempt status.
“Pastors should decide what they preach from the pulpit, not the IRS,” said Senior Legal Counsel Erik Stanley. “It’s outrageous for pastors and churches to be threatened or punished by the government for applying biblical teachings to all areas of life, including candidates and elections. The question is, ‘Who should decide the content of sermons: pastors or the IRS?’”
“No government-recognized status can be conditioned upon the surrender of a constitutionally protected right,” Stanley explained. “No one would suggest a pastor give up his church’s tax-exempt status if he wants to keep his constitutional protection against illegal search and seizure or cruel and unusual punishment. Likewise, no one should be asking him to give up his church’s tax-exempt status to be able to keep his constitutionally protected right to free speech.”
Pulpit Freedom Sunday is an event associated with the Pulpit Initiative, a legal effort designed to secure the free speech rights of pastors in the pulpit. Alliance Defending Freedom hopes to eventually go to court to have the Johnson Amendment struck down as unconstitutional for its regulation of sermons, which are protected by the First Amendment.
Pulpit Freedom Sunday began in 2008 with 33 participating pastors. Participation increased each year, with last year’s participation blossoming to 539.
In additional remarks about the event, pro-life attorney Stanley explains why it was important:
In the wake of the most successful Pulpit Freedom Sunday to date, a look at opponents who have commented publicly about the event in recent days shows that they are still attacking it for something it’s clearly not. In other words, the arguments against Pulpit Freedom Sunday fail because the premise for those arguments is all wrong.
This year, as part of the event, nearly 1,600 pastors nationwide preached sermons that analyzed the positions of various political candidates—an exercise in free speech that violates a flawed Internal Revenue Service rule known as the Johnson Amendment. The goal is to create a court case that will challenge the constitutionality of the rule in court.
But objectors—such as Bloomberg View, as just one example—have made several fundamental errors in their assertion that this is really just all a taxation issue that has nothing to do with free speech.
That editorial admits, “The line between religious belief and political action is often indistinct,” but then states that “pastors demanding government tax preferences for political crusades have clearly crossed it.”
But pastors who participate in Pulpit Freedom Sunday are not engaging in a “political crusade.”
Instead, they are simply applying Scripture and theological doctrine to the positions held by the candidates running for office. Pastors have been applying scriptural teaching to circumstances facing their congregations for centuries. This is not “political” speech. Rather, it’s core religious expression from a spiritual leader to his congregants. That kind of expression is at the very center of the freedom of speech and religion protections in the First Amendment.
The real question is this: When has the government ever been allowed to condition any government-recognized status (such as tax-exempt status) on the surrender of a constitutionally protected freedom?
Those who so easily say, “If you want to exercise your right to free speech, just give up your tax-exempt status,” don’t see the obvious problem with that line of reasoning. Are they also prepared to say, “If you want to exercise your right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure, just give up your tax-exempt status” or “if you want to maintain your right against cruel and unusual punishment, just give up your tax-exempt status”?
Just as with those other rights, free speech is a constitutionally protected freedom, not a privilege that the government can grant or revoke while dangling the tax-exempt status of the speaker’s church over his head. That’s why the IRS rule against free speech for pastors should be struck down as unconstitutional.
Another straw-man claim that has been put forth is that Congress created the Johnson Amendment to ensure that churches don’t get a subsidy for political activity. First of all, as is well documented, this is not why Congress created the rule. Then-Senator Lyndon Johnson introduced the rule without debate and got it passed in 1954 with little notice as a means to silence non-profit groups that opposed his bid for re-election. Neither he nor Congress had any intention of applying the rule to churches to silence their religious speech, no matter how much groups like Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the Freedom From Religion Foundation would love for people to believe otherwise.
Secondly, the federal government does not “subsidize” religion when the IRS grants a tax-exempt status to a church. In fact, tax exemption cannot be not a government subsidy unless you believe that no one can actually have their own money and that it all belongs to the government—an idea that the U.S. Supreme Court rejected just last year.
It’s not the case that the church has a bunch of the government’s money and must justify why the government can’t demand it back. No, the government has a duty to justify why it must take money that belongs to its citizens.
And since churches, like most charities, are non-profits that have been outside of the government’s legitimate tax base since the founding of the nation, the government has no automatic right to the church’s money just because its pastor won’t give up his constitutionally protected right to free speech.
Some point to the deduction individuals receive for their church contributions as a “benefit” that justifies suppressing the free speech and freedom of religion of churches. But individuals can also claim a deduction for contributions to other tax-exempt groups, such as veterans’ organizations, who are not subject to the Johnson Amendment. Why should churches be treated any differently?
Some cynics and conspiracy theorists like to point to a handful of church excesses and demand that all churches be burdened with taxes. But that doesn’t wash either. The vast majority of churches are far from “wealthy” and do tremendous good for their communities—often relieving the government and taxpayers of having to provide a whole host of community services. And that’s just one reason why the government has never done taxpayers and all citizens the disservice of taxing churches and charities. Reducing their ability to do good does no one any good whatsoever.
Most troubling of all is the ease with which some who oppose Pulpit Freedom Sunday like to cite the so-called “separation of church and state” while at the same time advocating that the state regulate the speech of the church. No, as America’s founders would have agreed, a pastor is the one who should determine what he says from the pulpit, not the federal government—and that is as it should be.
26 USC § 508 - Special rules with respect to
(a) New organizations must notify Secretary that they are applying for recognition of section 501(c)(3) status
Except as provided in subsection (c), an organization organized after October 9, 1969, shall not be treated as an organization described in section 501 (c)(3)—
(1) unless it has given notice to the Secretary in such manner as the Secretary may by regulations prescribe, that it is applying for recognition of such status, or
(2) for any period before the giving of such notice, if such notice is given after the time prescribed by the Secretary by regulations for giving notice under this subsection.
(b) Presumption that organizations are private foundations
Except as provided in subsection (c), any organization (including an organization in existence on October 9, 1969) which is described in section 501 (c)(3) and which does not notify the Secretary, at such time and in such manner as the Secretary may by regulations prescribe, that it is not a private foundation shall be presumed to be a private foundation.
(c) Exceptions
(1) Mandatory exceptions
Subsections (a) and (b) shall not apply to—
(A) churches, their integrated auxiliaries, and conventions or associations of churches, or
(B) any organization which is not a private foundation (as defined in section 509 (a)) and the gross receipts of which in each taxable year are normally not more than $5,000.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/508
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For reference:
26 USC § 501 - Exemption from tax on corporations, certain trusts, etc.
(a) Exemption from taxation
An organization described in subsection (c) or (d) orsection 401 (a) shall be exempt from taxation under this subtitle unless such exemption is denied under section 502 or 503.
(b) Tax on unrelated business income and certain other activities
An organization exempt from taxation under subsection (a) shall be subject to tax to the extent provided in parts II, III, and VI of this subchapter, but (notwithstanding parts II, III, and VI of this subchapter) shall be considered an organization exempt from income taxes for the purpose of any law which refers to organizations exempt from income taxes.
(c) List of exempt organizations
The following organizations are referred to in subsection (a):
(1) Any corporation organized under Act of Congress which is an instrumentality of the United States but only if such corporation—
(A) is exempt from Federal income taxes—
(i) under such Act as amended and supplemented before July 18, 1984, or
(ii) under this title without regard to any provision of law which is not contained in this title and which is not contained in a revenue Act, or
(B) is described in subsection (l).
(2) Corporations organized for the exclusive purpose of holding title to property, collecting income therefrom, and turning over the entire amount thereof, less expenses, to an organization which itself is exempt under this section. Rules similar to the rules of subparagraph (G) of paragraph (25) shall apply for purposes of this paragraph.
(3) Corporations, and any community chest, fund, or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational purposes, or to foster national or international amateur sports competition (but only if no part of its activities involve the provision of athletic facilities or equipment), or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals, no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual, no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation (except as otherwise provided in subsection (h)), and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/501
Catholic Church Control of Government Un-Noticed: False Belief of Religion and Politics Don't Mix
The Catholic Church knows all to well that religion and politics
mixes very easily, and they use it to their advantage. While the
Protestant Church is constrained by their greed to retain their tax
exempt status, and the Political junkies fear losing their lives in
another Inquisition if Church and State were ever to come together
again. What they don't realize is that the Catholic Church doesn't work
with any these pre-conceived ideas or constaints, and go un-noticed in
their control of our Government, and have been controlling and
manipulating this Country since its creation.See: The Secret Terrorists (Secret Jesuit Plot to Take Over USA) http://www.scribd.com/doc/36056155/Hughes-The-Secret-Terrorists-Secret-Jesuit-Plot-to-Take-Over-USA-2002
The Enemy Unmasked http://www.scribd.com/doc/108804475/The-Enemy-Unmasked-By-Bill-Hughes
What I have noticed in years of posting news regarding the combination of politics and religion, the religious people complain that politics has no place in their religious discussions, most likely due to their fear of losing the 501(c)(3) tax exempt status that they work so hard to keep. For an example, look at the Official Seventh-day Adventist Church website regarding their Trademark Guidelines -
'Church trademarks shall not be used in any manner that will jeopardize the Church's tax-exempt status'.
Seventh-day Adventist Trademark Guidelines http://www.adventist.org/beliefs/guidelines/main-guide5.html
John Brownlee 501c3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWVq0M2ab6U&feature=
When I post in political groups, they bring up the separation of Church and State argument.
Separation of church and state in the United States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States
Is 'Separation of Church & State' in the US Constitution?
http://www.examiner.com/article/is-separation-of-church-state-the-us-constitution
IRS–ROMAN CULT’S COLLECTION AGENCY
The Roman Catholic Jesuits started the international banking system
called the Illuminati and the Agentur (and blamed the Jews for this).
Rome’s motto is, “He that holds the money bags runs the nations.” The
Vatican started all the wars (inquisitions) to rid the world of heretics
(non-Roman Catholics) and then made loans from her banks to nations so
they would have enough money to fight them. We foolishly permitted
this cult’s collection agency into our country (the IRS—which answers
only to Rome).According to God’s laws in the Bible, every fifty years there is to be a clearing of debts that can’t be paid (a relief). This is called the year of jubilee (Lev. 25:10). Let’s bump cultish Roman canon law of death and bondage and get back to God’s law and His Son, Christ Jesus. Let’s have a clearing (the year of jubilee). These debts have been instigated by Satan (the Roman Catholic cult) to hurt us and put us into financial bondage. We didn’t start these wars, we didn’t want these wars, and we didn’t borrow that money. So why should we have to suffer? These wars were all Roman Catholic inquisitions to mold the world into a one-world government, church, and media.
At the one-world church convention in Vancouver, some of our volunteers were shocked by the pro-homosexual booths and literature, pro-witchcraft booths and literature, drunkenness, and total ungodliness, which this “universal” world’s largest cult and sect exalts. These satanic people call anybody that preaches the true Word, which is separation from evil, consecration unto good –they call this a cult or a sect. But they worship this one-world organization and its cult leader, the pope...
“Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he [or a soon to come pope] as God [will soon sit] in the temple of God [in Jerusalem], showing himself that he is God” (II Thes. 2:4).
“Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish” (II Thes. 2:9-10).
They kneel and kiss his ring and feet and call him “holy father,” which is forbidden in the Bible. They obey his every wish. By calling us a cult, who walk in the Spirit and obey God’s every wish, they have possibly committed the unpardonable sin–blasphemy of the Holy Spirit–which is never forgiven in this world nor in the world to come (Matt. 12:31-32). But Satan does not care because he already has blasphemed the Holy Spirit.
501 (c)(3) Government Takeover of the Church http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MF4FgXpS3o&list=PLCCF8654F98136456&feature=
More: IS THE POPE THE SUPER-BOSS OF ALL GOVERNMENT'S? http://inquisitionnews.blogspot.com/2009/11/is-pope-super-boss-of-all-governments.html#links
Remember Tue Jul 7, 2009? Pope calls for a "global authority" on economy http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/07/07/us-pope-encyclical-idUSTRE5662VM20090707
Then: Given in Rome, at Saint Peter's, on 29 June, the Solemnity of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul, in the year 2009, the fifth of my Pontificate. ENCYCLICAL LETTER CARITAS IN VERITATE (Charity In Truth) is introduced to the public . http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20090629_caritas-in-veritate_en.html
ENCYCLICAL LETTER CARITAS IN VERITATE explained by ex-Catholic Priest Richard Bennett - CARITAS IN VERITATE: The Pope’s Plans on Organizing Political, Economic and Religious Activities Worldwide http://inquisitionnews.blogspot.com/p/caritas-in-veritate-popes-plans-on.html
Then: Mon Sep 21, 2009 after the pope discussed the global downturn with U.S. President Barack Obama: U.S. to push for new economic world order at G20 http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/09/21/us-g-idUSTRE58G34Z20090921
Finally, Please view this video for more on the New World Order and the Re-Distribution of the Worlds Wealth: Walter Veith - A New World Order / Total Onslaught http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BomP-eZ5lYM
The Roman Catholic Footprint is All Over this Organization [Just check the Bio's of the Staff]. If Pastor's wanted to make a STATEMENT why wait till RON PAUL, the ONLY Constitutionalist, was scammed out of the Nomination. Also, Sadly most Pastors [Even, so called Protestants] are so politically ignorant as to not know how to vet a Candidate.
Almost 1,600 Pastors Defy IRS, Preach Politics From Pulpit
by Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com
A record number of pastors this past Sunday defied IRS rules and
regulations and preached politics from their pulpits as a way to protest
the restrictive guidelines placed on churches.
A total of 1,586 pastors participated in Pulpit Freedom Sunday in all
50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. This is the fifth
annual event sponsored by Alliance Defending Freedom, a pro-life legal
group.
The registered pastors committed to preach sermons that present biblical perspectives on the positions of electoral candidates. In so doing, they exercised their constitutionally protected freedom to engage in religious expression from the pulpit despite an Internal Revenue Service rule known as the Johnson Amendment that activist groups often use to silence churches by threatening their tax-exempt status.
“Pastors should decide what they preach from the pulpit, not the IRS,” said Senior Legal Counsel Erik Stanley. “It’s outrageous for pastors and churches to be threatened or punished by the government for applying biblical teachings to all areas of life, including candidates and elections. The question is, ‘Who should decide the content of sermons: pastors or the IRS?’”
“No government-recognized status can be conditioned upon the surrender of a constitutionally protected right,” Stanley explained. “No one would suggest a pastor give up his church’s tax-exempt status if he wants to keep his constitutional protection against illegal search and seizure or cruel and unusual punishment. Likewise, no one should be asking him to give up his church’s tax-exempt status to be able to keep his constitutionally protected right to free speech.”
Pulpit Freedom Sunday is an event associated with the Pulpit Initiative, a legal effort designed to secure the free speech rights of pastors in the pulpit. Alliance Defending Freedom hopes to eventually go to court to have the Johnson Amendment struck down as unconstitutional for its regulation of sermons, which are protected by the First Amendment.
Pulpit Freedom Sunday began in 2008 with 33 participating pastors. Participation increased each year, with last year’s participation blossoming to 539.
In additional remarks about the event, pro-life attorney Stanley explains why it was important:
In the wake of the most successful Pulpit Freedom Sunday to date, a look at opponents who have commented publicly about the event in recent days shows that they are still attacking it for something it’s clearly not. In other words, the arguments against Pulpit Freedom Sunday fail because the premise for those arguments is all wrong.
This year, as part of the event, nearly 1,600 pastors nationwide preached sermons that analyzed the positions of various political candidates—an exercise in free speech that violates a flawed Internal Revenue Service rule known as the Johnson Amendment. The goal is to create a court case that will challenge the constitutionality of the rule in court.
But objectors—such as Bloomberg View, as just one example—have made several fundamental errors in their assertion that this is really just all a taxation issue that has nothing to do with free speech.
That editorial admits, “The line between religious belief and political action is often indistinct,” but then states that “pastors demanding government tax preferences for political crusades have clearly crossed it.”
But pastors who participate in Pulpit Freedom Sunday are not engaging in a “political crusade.”
Instead, they are simply applying Scripture and theological doctrine to the positions held by the candidates running for office. Pastors have been applying scriptural teaching to circumstances facing their congregations for centuries. This is not “political” speech. Rather, it’s core religious expression from a spiritual leader to his congregants. That kind of expression is at the very center of the freedom of speech and religion protections in the First Amendment.
The real question is this: When has the government ever been allowed to condition any government-recognized status (such as tax-exempt status) on the surrender of a constitutionally protected freedom?
Those who so easily say, “If you want to exercise your right to free speech, just give up your tax-exempt status,” don’t see the obvious problem with that line of reasoning. Are they also prepared to say, “If you want to exercise your right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure, just give up your tax-exempt status” or “if you want to maintain your right against cruel and unusual punishment, just give up your tax-exempt status”?
Just as with those other rights, free speech is a constitutionally protected freedom, not a privilege that the government can grant or revoke while dangling the tax-exempt status of the speaker’s church over his head. That’s why the IRS rule against free speech for pastors should be struck down as unconstitutional.
Another straw-man claim that has been put forth is that Congress created the Johnson Amendment to ensure that churches don’t get a subsidy for political activity. First of all, as is well documented, this is not why Congress created the rule. Then-Senator Lyndon Johnson introduced the rule without debate and got it passed in 1954 with little notice as a means to silence non-profit groups that opposed his bid for re-election. Neither he nor Congress had any intention of applying the rule to churches to silence their religious speech, no matter how much groups like Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the Freedom From Religion Foundation would love for people to believe otherwise.
Secondly, the federal government does not “subsidize” religion when the IRS grants a tax-exempt status to a church. In fact, tax exemption cannot be not a government subsidy unless you believe that no one can actually have their own money and that it all belongs to the government—an idea that the U.S. Supreme Court rejected just last year.
It’s not the case that the church has a bunch of the government’s money and must justify why the government can’t demand it back. No, the government has a duty to justify why it must take money that belongs to its citizens.
And since churches, like most charities, are non-profits that have been outside of the government’s legitimate tax base since the founding of the nation, the government has no automatic right to the church’s money just because its pastor won’t give up his constitutionally protected right to free speech.
Some point to the deduction individuals receive for their church contributions as a “benefit” that justifies suppressing the free speech and freedom of religion of churches. But individuals can also claim a deduction for contributions to other tax-exempt groups, such as veterans’ organizations, who are not subject to the Johnson Amendment. Why should churches be treated any differently?
Some cynics and conspiracy theorists like to point to a handful of church excesses and demand that all churches be burdened with taxes. But that doesn’t wash either. The vast majority of churches are far from “wealthy” and do tremendous good for their communities—often relieving the government and taxpayers of having to provide a whole host of community services. And that’s just one reason why the government has never done taxpayers and all citizens the disservice of taxing churches and charities. Reducing their ability to do good does no one any good whatsoever.
Most troubling of all is the ease with which some who oppose Pulpit Freedom Sunday like to cite the so-called “separation of church and state” while at the same time advocating that the state regulate the speech of the church. No, as America’s founders would have agreed, a pastor is the one who should determine what he says from the pulpit, not the federal government—and that is as it should be.
No comments:
Post a Comment