From the WSJ Opinion Archives
HOUSES OF WORSHIP
Bullying the Pulpits
The IRS threatens church leaders who talk about politics.
Earlier this year, 31 Ohio pastors called down the most powerful force they could find against two of their fellow church leaders in Columbus. No, it wasn't God--but close.
In a complaint filed with the Internal Revenue Service, the pastors alleged that the Rev. Russell Johnson and the Rev. Rod Parsley crossed the line into advocacy over the past year by preaching on political topics, initiating a voter registration drive and associating with Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, a Republican who is now running for governor.
Both Mr. Johnson and Mr. Parsley are fighting back, arguing that they've done nothing wrong by speaking out on what they see as moral, not just political, issues. If the IRS agrees with their accusers, however, the World Harvest Church and the Fairfield Christian Church could lose their tax-exempt status. It would be unusual for the IRS to mete out this kind of punishment, but as gay marriage, abortion and the war in Iraq increasingly draw religious leaders into politics, such complaints may become more common.
Just a few weeks after the pastors filed their grievance, the IRS released a report on the outcome of 132 similar anonymous filings against nonprofit organizations during the course of the 2004 presidential campaign, 63 of which are churches. The allegations against the churches include: inviting candidates to speak, donating money to politicians, endorsing individual candidates and publishing voter guides. Some of the cases were thrown out immediately, but 37 of the 47 churches that were investigated further were deemed to have run afoul of the tax code.
After the report came out, IRS Commissioner Mark Everson called the involvement of nonprofit and religious organizations in politics "disturbing not because it's pervasive, but because it has the potential to really grow and have a very bad impact on the integrity of charities and churches." He also sent letters of reprimand to 55 of the sinning organizations and is threatening three others (though none of them churches) with the loss of their tax exemption.
The IRS also just issued some guidelines to help churches to steer clear of the agency's attention in the future. Interestingly, the IRS acknowledges in the document that there is "no bright line test" and that any government evaluation will "require the balancing of all the facts and circumstances."
Punishment for not following the IRS guidelines can include, in addition to losing tax-exempt status, being forced to pay a 10% excise tax on all donations for a specified period of time. For nonprofits that don't file tax returns and therefore don't keep up with the paperwork requirements of complying with the tax code, these punishments would not merely be acts of contrition--they could result in a church shutting the doors of, say, its soup kitchen or other social services that it provides. But most of all, it may shut down its messages from the pulpit.
And for what purpose? Not surprisingly, a political one. Since this process is driven by citizen complaints, many of the churches to come under the tax microscope are in swing states (since the stakes will be higher). The outcome of the IRS's action--intended or not--could have far-reaching effects on local, state and national elections. And though many of the churches that have been investigated favor conservatives, liberal pastors have found the IRS pounding on their doors as well.
In response to this scourge, the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty--a Washington, D.C., public-interest law firm representing all faiths--has sent to every house of worship they could find a letter promising to defend these institutions (free of charge) if they are targeted by the IRS for political speech.
So far the agency has issued letters of reprimand rather than actual fines, an indication, perhaps, that even tax officials aren't sure about this little-explored corner of tax law. In fact, the letters are usually enough. Most churches will be easily intimidated, not having the resources to drag the IRS into court. But now, with the help of the Becket Fund, they can.
Telling pastors what topics they may and may not address from the pulpit would seem to be a violation of the First Amendment, but IRS lawyers say that the churches implicitly accept such limitations in exchange for being tax exempt. Becket Fund spokesman Jared Leland argues that pastors cannot be forced to give up their right to free speech.
The danger here is that church leaders will cede the right to discuss the big moral subjects of the day in an effort to avoid touching on a political debate. As Mr. Leland notes, the line between what the IRS considers acceptable political discussion and what it considers an unacceptable endorsement of a candidate is "very fuzzy," so religious officials will err on the side of not attracting IRS scrutiny.
Mr. Parsley has no such intention though. He is incensed at the idea that anyone would "deny clergy the right to be heard simply because they may not agree with our values." In a reaction to the IRS that's not unusual this time of year, Mr. Parsley sighs: "It's un-American."
Mr. Miniter is assistant editor of OpinionJournal.com.
