On July 7, the IRS announced it no longer will enforce restrictions on places of worship endorsing political candidates provided those endorsements occur in the regular communication of the congregation to its members.
This is a suspension of enforcement of the Johnson Amendment, a law that restricts 501(c)(3) nonprofits, including religious congregations, from engaging directly in partisan politics — including endorsing candidates for political offices. Since its enactment in 1954, the IRS has rarely and irregularly enforced the restriction, particularly for Christian congregations. In fact, when I read the various articles on the announcement my initial reaction was nothing more than a passing, “So what?”
Ben Huelskamp
Yet, as I’ve read and listened to commentators discuss the points, assumptions and potential issues involved, my reaction has become more nuanced. In this essay, I consider several important points pastors and other faith leaders should bear in mind while navigating the IRS announcement and what it might mean for our congregations and ministries.
The Johnson Amendment remains law
First and perhaps most importantly, the Johnson Amendment remains law. While the IRS, as the enforcing agency, has the prerogative not to hold congregations accountable, it does not have the authority to rescind or invalidate a part of the tax code. Congress would need to pass a law amending the code for the restriction to be removed entirely.
This means the IRS could again choose to enforce the restriction with little or no notice to congregations. In short, there is nothing in the IRS announcement that ensures its selective enforcement of the Johnson Amendment will continue.
The IRS announcement pertains to a specific case
The July 7 announcement settles a lawsuit (National Religious Broadcasters et al. v. Long) brought by the National Religious Broadcasters, Intercessors for America and two churches in Texas in 2024 in a federal court in the Eastern District of Texas. The settlement only commits the IRS not to enforce the Johnson Amendment with regard to the two churches involved in the lawsuit.
The order says nothing about any other congregation. Once again, there is nothing to guarantee the IRS will not enforce the restriction against any other congregation in the United States.
Clergy and congregations should carefully consider the risk of endorsing candidates
Given the previous two points, it’s clear there is nothing preventing the IRS from deciding to enforce the Johnson Amendment again and perhaps doing so selectively. It is entirely possible the IRS, acting alone or as a tool of the Trump administration, could begin punishing congregations, denominations or faith traditions for endorsing opposition candidates or for preaching against administration or party actions.
“There is nothing preventing the IRS from deciding to enforce the Johnson Amendment again and perhaps doing so selectively.”
Given the lengths the administration is taking against prominent institutions of higher education, the same happening to congregations is more than possible.
In this environment, clergy and congregations need to take time when deciding if they will endorse candidates for any elected office. Careful discernment is particularly necessary for non-Judeo-Christian congregations. The current administration demonstrates a clear preference for evangelical Christianity and, as a pawn in its Christian nationalism, Judaism. Islamic and Sikh congregations as well as progressive Christian and Jewish congregations need to be particularly careful if they decide to endorse candidates.
The environment of congregations and politics will change
Anyone who pays attention to congregations and their involvement in or adjacent to politics knows some congregations have creatively skirted the Johnson Amendment. So, too, have candidates found ways to insert themselves into important, historic and large congregations, often to curry the favor of a particular group.
For instance, Democratic presidential candidates often will speak at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, once led by Martin Luther King Jr., and now led by Sen. Raphael Warnock. More recently, Republican candidates have begun making Thomas Road Baptist Church, the church founded by Jerry Falwell, a necessary stop.
We can imagine a reality in which, freed from restrictions on political campaigning, congregations become more and more entrenched in the political maneuvering of candidates, parties and other actors. In fields of ideologically aligned candidates, will places of worship act prophetically and support the candidate they feel will best espouse their values or will they succumb to the highest bidders?
Endorsing political candidates is pastoral malpractice
As a pastor, I’m often conflicted about how many of my ideas and my ideology I insert into sermons and other statements. While I routinely tell my congregation they are under no obligation to agree with me and I welcome open, civil disagreement and discussion, I still wonder if I stray into telling people what they should believe or how they should act.
“My call is to speak prophetically to the congregation God and the people have called me to as pastor.”
My call is to speak prophetically to the congregation God and the people have called me to as pastor. As a progressive Christian, my messages are filled with liberation and queer theology. They critique empire and the political forces of our state, country and world.
However, there is a difference between preaching prophetically based on my academic and revealed understanding and directly endorsing candidates for political offices at any level. I believe the gospel is political but not only is it not my place to tell my congregation who to vote for, it’s not my job to tell them what or how to believe.
In a recent message, I called the congregation to “vote in every election,” and I implored them to “worship with our votes.” I agonized for days about those phrases. Did my message compel my congregation to vote in a certain way? Was I using rhetoric akin to “You can’t be a Christian and vote for (insert group here)?”
All pastors should be wrestling with these questions. Depoliticize our messages and we cease to speak prophetically. Demand that our people think a particular way or support specific candidates and we have done harm to the people God has entrusted to our care.
Pastors, the IRS announcement is an opportunity
Inevitably, the more pastors and congregations embrace the opportunity to support and endorse candidates publicly, the more pastors and congregations will overcorrect and sanitize the words their congregations desperately need to hear. This is not a moment for progressive preachers to self-censor.
Progressive Christians, particularly those of us appointed to preach and with captive audiences and access to pulpits, should hear this as a call to speak truth to power and increase the prophetic nature of our sermons.
We know this moment in the history of Christianity and in the life of our nation calls for courage. That courage should not falter in the pulpit and in the many ways we communicate to the people who look to us as pastors. Speaking prophetically and calling our congregations and our nation to morality is different from selling our pulpits to the highest political bidder and engaging in the comfortable act of sustaining empires.
Pastor, leader, Christian, our voices are needed more than ever, especially because others will now seize the moment to endorse politicians working against the ministry, witness and words of Jesus.
Ben Huelskamp is a leader, pastor, writer, activist and public intellectual. Ordained in The Fellowship of Affirming Ministries, he serves as executive director of LOVEboldly and as pastor of Blue Ocean Faith Columbus.
Related articles:
Trump administration says it won’t enforce Johnson Amendment
What good is a law that’s not enforced? | Analysis by Mark Wingfield
Does the Johnson Amendment have any teeth left?
‘Anti-Christian bias’ task force focuses solely on grievances of evangelicals