Participants: Lincoln Steed (Host), Greg Hamilton
Series Code: LI
Program Code: LI000361A
|
00:25 Welcome to the Liberty Insider.
00:27 This is the program bringing you discussion, 00:29 news, up-to-date information, and insights 00:32 on religious liberty events in the US and around the world. 00:35 My name is Lincoln Steed, editor of Liberty magazine 00:39 and my guest is Greg Hamilton, 00:42 president of the Northwest Religious Liberty Association. 00:45 Good to be here. 00:46 With a grand and presently, very successful program. 00:51 Thank you. 00:53 Let's talk about something that I think we're gonna hear 00:55 a lot more about in the next few months, 00:57 The 1954 Johnson Amendment as it's known 01:02 or as I like to think of it, because it didn't die there, 01:06 the story of the Jones bill of about 15-20 years ago. 01:11 Remind me of that. 01:13 I had a long talk with someone 01:15 that you mentioned in one of our other programs, 01:18 D. James Kennedy. 01:20 I had him write an article for Liberty magazine, 01:23 because he was one of the major proponents for the Jones bill 01:27 which was a proposal through Congress to allow the churches 01:32 to function as political action groups, 01:34 whereas D. James Kennedy often said, 01:37 he says, "Unbind the churches, let them free." 01:40 And they would have been free to raise unlimited amounts 01:42 of money for political campaigns, 01:44 promote any candidate they want, 01:47 and in essence, become political action groups. 01:49 And that was interesting because that was at the time, 01:51 I think it was Feingold, who was the other proponent, 01:55 the Campaign Reform Act. 01:57 Russell Feingold, the McCain Feingold Act. 02:00 McCain Feingold, 02:01 that was limiting the amount of money that could be given... 02:03 Right, which was struck down 02:05 by Citizens United at the Supreme Court. 02:07 Yes, that's a good point. 02:08 But anyhow, at that time, the churches would have emerged 02:12 as major political forces but the irony is, 02:16 as you know now, and we want to talk about it, 02:19 this new administration are openly talking 02:22 about doing away with the Johnson Amendment. 02:24 Now what was the Johnson Amendment? 02:26 Well, the Johnson Amendment arose through the actions 02:30 and the efforts of then Senator, 02:31 Lyndon B. Johnson or LBJ, 02:34 who became President after the assassination 02:36 of John F. Kennedy, and essentially, 02:39 the attempt by LBJ 02:43 was to limit the influence of interest groups 02:49 to affect political outcomes, electoral outcomes, 02:52 and to make public policy. 02:55 Now... 02:57 He did this as a payback, 02:58 because the churches were quite active 03:01 in supporting his political opponent, 03:04 I think for his re-election or a major campaign. 03:07 So it was really designed directly to punish them. 03:10 Yeah, but it was aimed basically 03:12 at religious interest groups 03:13 and not so much churches but, nevertheless... 03:15 Well, non-profits came under that. 03:18 That's right, so, nevertheless, 03:20 the Johnson Amendment was proposed. 03:22 It passed Congress and it's been regulatory law 03:26 for the IRS ever since, 03:28 in terms of what churches can do 03:30 and what it can't do. 03:31 Now, it should be understood 03:33 what the Johnson Amendment actually allows. 03:36 It's not as limiting 03:37 as the evangelical right in America 03:40 would make everybody believe and that's the problem, 03:43 is that a lot of propaganda is out there that's false. 03:46 Well, it creates an inhibition. 03:49 In fact, I don't know that there's too many cases 03:51 of where action was taken to enforce it. 03:54 Yeah. 03:55 There was initially, about, in fact, 03:57 back in the 1990s 03:58 with the emergence of the Christian Coalition 04:00 and Pat Robertson's organization, 04:02 especially with their voter cards 04:04 and is this a violation of the... 04:06 Well, there's some talk and I remember, 04:09 Dr. Dobson had to create a separate subsection 04:12 to his organization because he was at risk under this 04:16 but nothing was ever done against him. 04:17 Right. 04:19 And there has been some murmuring 04:20 about some left wing Christian organizations 04:24 because, obviously, they were what the people, 04:27 like, were supporting were offensive 04:29 but nothing much done that I know of. 04:31 Well, the voting cards even at the Christian Coalition, 04:33 the guidelines that they put out for people to look at 04:37 whether a senator or a representative in Congress 04:40 voted a certain way and what their scorecard was 04:43 on particular issues that were of interest 04:45 to the Christian Coalition at that time, 04:48 and Pat Robertson still puts out 04:49 that voting scorecard by the way, 04:52 but they found when it was taken to court 04:55 by American United 04:56 for Separation of Church and State, 04:58 they took Pat Robertson's organization to court 05:00 and the court says, well, ultimately, 05:02 none of those scorecards endorse a particular candidate, 05:06 it doesn't directly endorse. 05:08 It may suggest but it doesn't directly endorse 05:11 and so that created a wider chasm 05:13 and from that point on, 05:15 it seemed that the IRS relaxed the Johnson Amendment, 05:19 in terms of its application including, especially, 05:22 they've never really touched African-American churches 05:25 which have always been very vocal 05:28 about civil rights and racial issues. 05:30 Now, you're getting at my view. 05:32 I haven't read this anywhere 05:33 but I read history and my deduction 05:35 that I, I would defend this a long way. 05:38 I think Lyndon Johnson's action was, we know, 05:42 was personal 'cause he was a very... 05:45 Right. 05:46 He could be a mean politician, so he was one to hit this... 05:50 But he was very charismatic about it and very successful. 05:52 But still, why did it get through? 05:54 It couldn't have gotten through just on his personal animus. 05:58 That 1954 was the year of Brown v. Board of Education 06:04 That was the beginning of the civil rights movement 06:07 and what was the civil rights movement carried forward on? 06:11 The black protestant churches, 06:13 and I believe Johnson was... 06:18 If he was nothing else, he wasn't a southerner. 06:20 I think it suited them to trim the sails 06:23 of the black churches at that time 06:25 and so that's the subtext of it. 06:27 It was also that... 06:28 And I would want to support that sort of church activity. 06:31 This is the great irony. 06:32 We don't want churches becoming political, 06:35 but we also don't want the politicians 06:37 restricting moral actions by the churches. 06:40 It was at the height also of McCarthyism in 1954. 06:43 A very bad era, very bad era in the US history. 06:47 And it was also the year in which under god was added 06:50 to the Pledge of Allegiance which was interesting. 06:53 It was a strategic move 06:55 by the Eisenhower administration 06:56 to basically say to the Soviet Union 06:59 that we believe in God, 07:00 you don't, essentially, and so it was a strategic move 07:04 but back to what the Johnson Amendment allows 07:07 and what it doesn't allow, the Johnson Amendment allows 07:11 for you to speak on moral issues, 07:13 on religious issues, 07:15 on even political issues attached to religious 07:20 and civil moral issues. 07:22 And so this idea that you cannot speak 07:25 about these issues 07:26 even if they're attached to a particular candidate 07:28 at that time, or even a President running for office, 07:31 or a mayor, or a city or county counsel man, 07:34 or whoever, all levels of government, 07:36 you can do that. 07:37 You can even get your church involved in referenda, 07:39 that does not violate the Johnson Amendment, 07:42 so this idea that somehow if you say something 07:44 about same sex marriage or you say something 07:47 about abortion for the pulpit 07:49 or any of those issues, 07:50 that somehow you're gonna be investigated by IRS 07:54 and you're going to be under a lawsuit is nonsense. 07:57 It is absolute nonsense. 07:59 And so people have to understand 08:00 what it doesn't allow. 08:02 What it restricts is it says 08:04 that you cannot endorse a particular candidate, 08:06 so what you can do, 08:08 here's part of what you can do. 08:09 Let's say a church wants to invite a legislator, 08:13 or a representative, or a mayor who is running for office, 08:18 they have to invite also the opposing candidate. 08:21 If they invite both, then they're within the law, 08:26 the parameters of the law, and so our church, 08:29 for example, the Seventh-day Adventist Church 08:30 takes it one step further. 08:32 We say, "Well, you know, if you invite both 08:34 and only one is proposing to come, 08:37 just say no to both." 08:38 It's just better to not have the appearance, 08:40 so that you don't follow through. 08:41 Well, I hope we take it the other step, 08:43 that might be legal, it's not proper 08:46 to have political eliters holding forth 08:49 in the divine service time, in my view. 08:51 Right. 08:53 Well, we should be very careful about giving them sacred time. 08:57 Yes. 08:58 I had a huge issue with the pastor 09:00 in Australia on that. 09:02 They had the speaker 09:03 of the State Parliament come in. 09:06 He was there because he was presenting a flag 09:08 to the pathfinders, 09:10 but it ended up that they gave him the pulpit. 09:12 I was preaching that day and I just thought 09:14 it crossed the line of inappropriateness 09:18 in God's temple. 09:19 And I got up and I said, "You know, 09:21 people will dedicate their lives 09:22 to political leadership, and that's fine." 09:24 But I said, "In this building, they have no higher standing, 09:28 in fact, a lower standing than one of God's saints. 09:31 This is God's house." 09:33 And you know the principle very well. 09:35 In the middle ages, 09:36 the church was not a secular territory. 09:40 You could get sanctuary in it. 09:41 We're gonna revisit that soon with the deportations 09:44 in the sanctuaries being offered. 09:47 So we got to be careful about that, 09:49 but as far as dealing with the law 09:51 and undue political entanglement. 09:53 The point is very good that you need to be evenhanded, 09:56 and, of course, this program, you and I are talking politics 09:59 the whole time, 10:00 there's nothing wrong with that. 10:01 We're not partisan. Right, that's right. 10:04 To be partisan is inappropriate. 10:07 Well, and it depends. 10:08 You can be perceived as partisan 10:10 if you're hammering out a particular issue, 10:12 whether it's abortion or anything else 10:13 but that still doesn't violate 10:15 the Johnson Amendment, just to be clear. 10:16 No, well, partisan is to be, 10:18 is Ellen White speaking to our own memberships. 10:20 She was against those that had a party affiliation, 10:24 that were on a party platform. 10:25 And that's where I was trying to go with this 10:27 and I would like to explain the final thing 10:29 that the Johnson Amendment doesn't allow for and that is, 10:33 it doesn't allow for any endorsement of any candidates 10:37 or fund raising or campaigning for a candidate, 10:41 and so that's crucial because what the proponents 10:44 who want to repeal the Johnson Amendment 10:46 including Donald Trump, who's promised that he's going, 10:49 you need to put forward an executive order 10:51 or it's gonna get past through Congress and, by the way, 10:54 there is a Congressional bill 10:55 It's House Joint Resolution 172, 10:57 as we speak right now, 10:58 and then there is a Senate Joint Resolution, 11:00 I think it's 264 or 274, I forget which one it is 11:06 but, anyway, the Senate Bill is not, is much more, 11:11 is not a bad bill per se 11:13 but the House Bill would allow churches 11:16 to use 25% of its budget for fund raising 11:20 and endorsing of candidates directly, 11:23 so not only can you preach from the pulpit a sermon 11:27 why a candidate should be elected, 11:29 you can use 25% of the offerings 11:32 given by church members, 11:34 that a church board can then turn around 11:36 and use your tax deductible money 11:39 to then support a candidate. 11:42 Now, can you imagine 11:43 how fast church coffers would dry up 11:47 if that was allowed? 11:49 You talk about the divisiveness within a church, 11:52 I mean, now it might not affect mega churches 11:55 but the average, you know, country church out there, 11:59 it would affect them tremendously. 12:00 Well, very soon, as in some ways, 12:03 in more humorous moments, 12:06 I make a comment about some of our membership, 12:08 very soon you would have a whole denomination, 12:11 perhaps, that's reflective of a certain political bias. 12:14 They're all of one mind. Yes. 12:16 You're not gonna have a cross-section 12:17 of the political community 12:20 united on the spiritual reality. 12:22 And the other thing that's worth remembering 12:24 and I think it's implicit in the Johnson Amendment. 12:27 He presented that amendment to punish those 12:33 that had supported his opponent. 12:34 Right. 12:35 Well, undoing, the bill is actually going 12:37 to increase the likelihood of punishment again. 12:39 The bill may end loud, but I can tell you, 12:42 if one party that loses and then gets power again, 12:45 sees that they were attacked by certain religious groups, 12:49 they would go for them 12:51 in other ways, that's the way politics works. 12:54 There's winners and losers. 12:56 Well, basically, we turn churches into super PACs, 12:59 in terms of the ability to raise money 13:01 and support candidates and to me... 13:03 You came under attack under the Obama administration. 13:05 The... 13:12 Taxation department were actually, IRS, 13:16 there was a wink-wink, nudge-nudge, 13:18 pretty much go after them. 13:20 Yes. 13:21 That was quite a scandal but it would basically 13:24 turn churches into super PACs 13:25 and it's what I call the temptation of power 13:28 and a prophetic warning. 13:30 This idea that politicians can use churches 13:36 for the advancement of their own need 13:42 for power and position is very problematic, 13:46 because anytime church moneys would be used 13:51 to supporting political candidates, 13:54 it puts the church in a position 13:56 of power to shape electoral outcomes 14:01 and to shape public policy, 14:04 to determine public policy outcomes. 14:07 It reminds me of what Ellen G White wrote 14:09 in The Great Controversy. 14:11 Seventh-day Adventist... Page 443. 14:13 Great Controversy, page 443. 14:15 She says, "In order for the United States," 14:17 that's our country, "In order for the United States 14:19 to form an image of the beast, 14:21 i.e., in the likeness of papal Rome, 14:24 during a 1260-year period 14:25 in which the church manipulated, dominated, 14:28 and controlled both kings and emperors, 14:30 the religious powers, 14:32 must so control the civil government, 14:34 that the authority of the state will also be employed 14:36 by the church to accomplish her own ends." 14:39 To me, that puts the churches in a, you say, well, okay, 14:43 politicians are using churches. 14:44 But if churches are willingly used 14:47 to jump into the political fray 14:49 and to control electoral outcomes 14:52 and to control public policy... 14:54 And becoming the second... 14:56 It is the setting up of the foundation 14:58 for the prophetic image to the beast. 14:59 Absolutely, let's take a break. 15:01 We'll be back shortly after to continue this discussion, 15:05 this prophetic discussion. |
Revised 2017-05-01