As I read the IRS Non-Profit instructions, any pastor/elder/bishop or any officer of the church that promotes a political position ("vote/don't vote for so-and-so, etc. is putting the Non-Profit status in jeopardy. If the church loses its non-profit status contributions will decrease since contributers would no longer be able to include these contributions in calculating individual and/or coporate taxes. A further question: If, God forbid, the denomination loses it s Tax Exempt Status (Non-Profit) does the local churches automatically lose also?

-- Anonymous, May 21, 2004

Answers

Reverend Paris,

Neither, the Congress, the Courts, The President, nor IRS can repeal the Bill of Rights. Like it or not Freedom of Speech and the Right to Public Assembly is Constitutionally guaranteed. Like it or not it is here to stay. Anyone or group who attempts to control it is overstepping their bounds and no court in the nation can or would agree with them.

-- Anonymous, May 21, 2004

IF that be the case, African American churches should have lost their not-for-profit status decades ago, since, historically, the African American church has been the headquarters of many political and social campaigns.

-- Anonymous, May 21, 2004

Robert - The Bill of Rights provides guarantees concerning the freedom of religious assembly and worship without government or state-support consent. The non-profit status Parson Paris addresses recognizes that this privilige can and will be revoked if a church serves as a de facto or de jure political entity. Is this what you want? Is this the principle we wish to teach our children - ignore the law because we have a more noble calling? Jesus stated that His House was to be called a House of Prayer not a place for political horsetrading and seamy compromises. Politics is a contact sport and you well know it ain't pretty regardless of one's partisan leanings. Also, just because some black churches have flagrantly gotten away with the practice of mixing politics and religion does it make it right? There is an organization in Wash DC called I believe, Americans United for the Separation of Church & State. They have been very successful in litigating cases where such a breech exists. If income tax returns are subject to audits and penalties because churches have lost thier non-profit status you can be assured that will directly affect the frequency of giving. As an economist this is an interesting possiblity to observe since my instincts suggest most people give to the church not because they are in agreement with the spiritual mission of the church but because they are able to receive a tax shelter. QED

-- Anonymous, May 21, 2004

Black churches have been getting a pass on the 501(c)3 issue because the black vote was and has been with the Democrats, (90%). It has been politically correct to simply ignore this issue. My fear is that we will lose our non-profit as a denomination and that will create a battle that the local church will have to fight to remain non-profit while our connection is not. Only about 10% of the congregation provide 90% of the church income. These are the ones who also use their contributions as a Tax deduction and you can expect a decrease in this source. Now some will go spiritual and say if they truly believed, the tax deduction dosen't matter but it does. Also, we would then have to pay our hotel taces, etc.

BTW whether we bash or praise or endorse; when we try to influence our members to vote in a certain way, we are at risk. I don't want to have to deal with Attorney General Ashcroft.

In Texas, most pastors are aware that we have been given passes on such things as building codes but not any more. Pastors have told me they arrived at church to find notices posted on the door listing the things that must be corrected.

Be Blessed

-- Anonymous, May 21, 2004

As usual Black churches are getting a black eye from the Republican tag team. But they fail to mention the vast number of conservative congregations that openly support and endorse Bush. So they must be in jeopardy too correct? No our Republican tag team would say they just support family values. Please if the IRS revoked the tax exempt status of the AME church or any other black denomination or any denomination of any race all hell would break loose. It would correctly be perceived as a political attack. You guys ought to know better.

-- Anonymous, May 22, 2004

Bill,

The African Methodist Episcopal Church has a great team of well- qualified lawyers, I am sure. More than once IRS has been challenged and proven wrong. Any attempt to hush free speech or the right to assemble is against the law wherever that assembly or speech is heard.

By the way Henry McNeal Turner was a Republican Georgia Legislator, not a Democrat. He freely spoke his mind. As a Chaplain in the US Army he once wrote and said. "The Negro Should Not Enter the Army". He also wrote and published, "The Outrage of the Supreme Court Against the Black Man". From his pulpit in Atlanta he often took President Andrew Johnson to task. He said, "Hell is an improvement over the United States of America when the Black man is concerned".

Some of the weak, cowardly opinions and actions I sometime see expressed on this board, and some that I find in our churches today, cause me to sometimes wonder if Richard Allen, Daniel Payne and Henry McNeal Turner were alive today, would they leave the AME Church and form a church of their own.

However, for me the question still comes to my mind, "Whether to serve God or Mammon?"

But, As for me and my house we will serve the Lord!!!!!!!!!!

-- Anonymous, May 22, 2004

Predictably, Bro. Harold can't exorcise the tormenting political demons from his commentary. My concern is foremost and always the welfare of black churches because that is where I choose to worship and voluntarily give my time, talent and treasure. Making references about white churches is nothing more than a diversionary tactic. Yes, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. I'm well aware of similar political tactics in white churches. I've stated this before and repeat it again, that too is equally wrong. However, the "family math value", two wrongs don't make a right, remains true. If you willingly and purposefully engage in inappropriate behavior, i.e. advancing political activities from a given pulpit, that is not only a flagrant breach of civic duty but it is also a clear violation of Biblical doctrine which teaches Christians should respect the rule of law (See I Timothy 2:1-3). The suggestion Harold offers that a black political backlash somehow protects and justifies the impropriety is nothing more than a tacit admission in support of lawlessnes and anarchy. Is this consistent with Paul's letter to Timothy? Are these the principles we seek to instill in our youth? I am convinced, without making references to partisan politics, that both answers should be in the negative. If we would spend half the amount of time worrying about what goes on in our black churches compared to what goes on in white churches we could go a long way towards fulfilling the our essential Mission described in St. Matthew 28:19-20. QED

-- Anonymous, May 22, 2004

Robert opines -

"Some of the weak, cowardly opinions and actions I sometime see expressed on this board, and some that I find in our churches today, cause me to sometimes wonder if Richard Allen, Daniel Payne and Henry McNeal Turner were alive today, would they leave the AME Church and form a church of their own."

It goes without saying the AMEC today is not your father's, grandfather's or great-grandfather's church. However despite her internal problems I don't believe the three Horsemen would conclude that their work was in vain. Change is inevitable because institutions like individuals are steadily evolving in order to better themselves. Both Payne and Turner championed positive change during their respective tenure so why should we expect anything different today? In fact, if the elitist, exclusionary & European standards of Payne went unchallenged (he was initially Lutheran) by future AMEs this church would be in no position to compete today. Failure to adapt to change can result in extinction if we aren't careful about simply protecting traditions just for the sake of tradition. The AMEC 50 years in the future will look quite different from what it is today. I just hope the demographics will include more 25-35 year old members. QED

-- Anonymous, May 22, 2004

Bill:

You did not read my post. I never mentioned anything about white churches. Here's what I wrote: "the vast number of conservative congregations that openly support and endorse Bush." Now if you choose to read that as "white" that is on you. What I truly think is that this particular argument is specious.

Yes, churches and non-profit organizations are supposed to be apolitical institutions but the fact of the matter is that they have always had some form of political bent when it has suited them both black and white.

I object to using the 501-c3 designation as a threat to shut up faithful congregations who object to the policies of any administration.

Yes I do vehemently object the following remark by Pastor Paris:

Black churches have been getting a pass on the 501(c)3 issue because the black vote was and has been with the Democrats, (90%).

and predictably I chose to make it plain and keep it real. By the way my well edu-ma-cated friend, how can one avoid the political demons in a thread that is by design political.

And what in the world were you referring to when you wrote this:

If you willingly and purposefully engage in inappropriate behavior, i.e. advancing political activities from a given pulpit, that is not only a flagrant breach of civic duty but it is also a clear violation of Biblical doctrine which teaches Christians should respect the rule of law (See I Timothy 2:1-3). The suggestion Harold offers that a black political backlash somehow protects and justifies the impropriety is nothing more than a tacit admission in support of lawlessnes and anarchy.

Here is what I wrote:

if the IRS revoked the tax exempt status of the AME church or any other black denomination or any denomination of any race all hell would break loose. It would correctly be perceived as a political attack.

where is this black backlash you write about? Notice my brother I did not limit this type of outrage to only black denominations. And where is the anarchy and lawlessness? Oh let me clarify the political outcry would be fast, fierce and furious and I don't think that statement promotes anything it is my prediction.

Loosen up man if you are going to attack me don't misquote or radically misinterpret my writing. Thanks

-- Anonymous, May 22, 2004

Responding to Brother Gibson: To my knowledge, there has been no 501(c)3 threat by Republicians or anyone else. I feel that we are leaving ourselves open to the possibility as the bishops/elders/pastors become more and more strident with their "bashing" of the president. After all, our current Attorney General is known to use every tactic at his command when he thinks he is being attacked. Consider the CIA agent whose cover was removed by as yet parties unknown.

And I agree that the AME Church does have very powerful competent lawyers, but I hasten to add very expensive lawyers. It is the local churches who will have to deal with each state that will bear the brunt of such an attack. No one has addressed the issue of the local church thus far.

I'm old enough to remember the times when we were given passes on numerous things as long as we didn't demand that our streets be paved and the garbage be picked up, and we didn't complain about the Honky- Tonk across the street from the church, and the dilapidated school buildings, and the less than adequate public swimming pools; need I say more?

But when we demand equality in all areas of life, and rightfully we must, along with the rights and privileges come responsibility; hence the passes are no longer there; and I agree that we have ALL rights, privileges and responsibility of all citizens.

BE Blessed

-- Anonymous, May 23, 2004

Harold -

But it was you who accussed me of giving black churces a "black eye" and attempting to make it a partisan issue. My initial poat only responded to the demerits of violating 501c3 status. Now please explain how a reasonaable interpretation of your phrase "the vast number of conservative congregations that openly support and endorse Bush." does NOT translate into white evangelical churches? I'm familiar with political and racial code words to know that your above phrase is nothing more than a euphemism for white churches. How many conservative black congregations can you point to that openly support and endorse President Bush? Your attempt to back pedal on the race issue aand broaden the definition of "conservative congregations" won't fly. Still despite this clear evidence of vacillation on your part you fail to address the fundamental point of my critic and contribution to this topic. That being the amoral and anti-civil messages black churches communicate when we deliberately violate the principles of church-state seperation. QED

-- Anonymous, May 23, 2004

Perhaps an example from my own church on how it should be done. My pastor invited the local director of a crisis pregnancy center to come and speak on abortion and the services the center offers. After he finished telling us of the horrors of abortion he said, "I don't want to tell you who to vote for, but let a candidate's position on the abortion issue be the primary consideration." This was followed by a round of hearty amen's. As Christians we knew who we were Biblically bound to vote for without ever mentioning a name.

Another thing you'll find in our church are comparison pamphlets. The two candidates are lined up side by side and their positions on a variety of issues are stated. No endorsement, but again as Christians we know who we're Biblically bound to support.

One interesting note: In a church in Oklahoma where these pamphlets were used a number of hard core democrats became furious. This simple technique made them look bad to their church. They could no longer justify their party and they were embarrassed.

-- Anonymous, May 23, 2004

Talk about timely. Just this morning in my church we had an excellent example of how it should be done. A guest missionary encouraged everyone to get out and vote. Again, no endorsement. He said this is the most important election in years, and if we don't have God's man in office we'll be judged. He noted Rowe vs Wade and and gay marriage, and reinterated how we'll be judged if these are not combatted.

It is the church's job to comment on moral issues. It can do this and never endanger its tax exempt status. The congregation, if properly taught, knows who to vote for.

BTW, the post above is mine. I typoed the name.

-- Anonymous, May 23, 2004

Bill:

I really am not concerned about your code words when I wrote that I was speaking of conservative churches and since you asked Windsor Village UMC in Houston immediately sprung to mind as one of those conservative black congregations where Bush is supported. Another since you asked is Higher Dimension in Tulsa OK. There are others if you want to know more find out for yourself. Stop thinking so narrowly.

Also I did not vacillate on anything I said. I will not allow you to speak for me. I don't do it for you I would appreciate similar treatment. My words were quite clear and when I have to say something about white people or institutions I say it without hesitation.

Finally, I did respond to what I feel is an attempt on the part of the republican tag team to silence the voice of the black church.

I am not really very familiar with any pastor who is promoting political positions in the name of the church. I personally do not care for political discussions of any nature in the church because I believe there are other forums.

However, I think churches serve their communities well when they allow their facilities to be used in a bi-partisan informational setting.

I certainly hope our churches are helping our congregations be better citizens. I hope they are holding candidate forums and voter registration drives. And since you are posting here and you are black I know that every black person is not a democrat.

Don't you ever misquote me again.

-- Anonymous, May 24, 2004

Harold,

What "republican tag team" is trying to silent the black church? I live in the Philadelphia area where Mayor Street was recently re- elected. Prior to his election a listening device was found in his office. Immediately it was shouted (even from the pulpit) that Ashcroft was trying to bring down the Mayor (nonsense). No evidence was provided to prove this. There's currently an on-going corruption investigation of Philadelphia city government. But there are those who will subscribe to conspiracy theories.

-- Anonymous, May 24, 2004

Harold opines -

"Don't you ever misquote me again."

Or else exactly what? Will I be asked to leave this forum? Will I be reported to my PE (Rev. Ralph Wilson) at the next Quarterly Conference? Will my daughter's application to Stanford U Med School in 2016 (The AME Legal Bicentennial Year) be mysteriously turned down thereby endangering her prospects for receiving the Noble Prize for Medicine in 2036? Your opening salvo in this thread interjects emotionally charged language like "black-eye" and Republican tag team. I didn't object and accepted it as part of your frequent aplication of rhetorical excess. I based my responses and remarks on what you stated. In a prior comment you stated "But they fail to mention the vast number of conservative congregations that openly support and endorse Bush." You respond by providing two examples of consevative black churches. Now no one has to have 25 years of experience in statistical inference like myself to know that two examples do not suggest a trend neither does it support your suggestion of a "vast number". If I was to use your own example that would mean the overwhelming number (99.98%) of conservative churches supporting Bush are non-black. This was precisely my point based on my conclusion of the coded language. Nothing is misquoted or not read. A difference in interpretation perhaps of figurative language but certainly nothing outside the bounds of debate. Former NBA great Charles Barkely was once asked about a comment in his autobiography by a reporter and Sir Charles responded, "my words were taken out of context by the writer" The writer was of course none other than Mr. Barkely. Yes, quotes can be annoying :-) QED

-- Anonymous, May 24, 2004

First: Ding Ding Ding! W.E.B. and Booker T., go back to your respective corners.

Second: There is not a Republican conspiracy. There is a plan, and it is intelligent, and prefectly legal.

We know that the Black Church has been linked to politics, for the most part Democrat. We know that that easiest place to reach our people with regard to voting, and issues is the pulpit.

The Republican Party knows this too. I am willing to bet that none of the Republican candidates has set foot in the A.M.E. church inthe last four years, if only to say "hello".

That being said, here is the tactic. The 501c3 provision has ALWAYS warned organizations (the church, Red Cross, Boy Scouts, etc) against promoting political positions. It prevents big money lobbyists from getting around the Federal Election Campaign limits.

So, the Republicans aren't coming to your church this year. But they don't want Kerry to stop by either. So they nudge the IRS, and remind them to remind all churches (but really the Black Church) not to do any campaigning from the pulpit or face losing their 501c3 status.

So the Democrats lose an avenue of getting the message out.

Now, to answer Rev. Paris' second question:

If the A.M.E. church lost its 501c3 status, and the local church did not have its own 501c3 (it was under the umbrella, much like the Boy Scouts and your local pack), then yes, those contributions would no longer be tax-deductible. This is why several pastors in, previous threads, encouraged all pastors/trustees/stewards to set up their own 501c3.

-- Anonymous, May 24, 2004

I actually like the boxing metaphor, especially after watching Antonio Tarver "KO" Roy Jones, Jr. on HBO last night for the undisputed light heavywieght championship of the world. Since I'm a former WEB Dubois Fellow at Harvard I suppose it is only fair and Right that I be identified as 'WEB' even though the Wizard of Tuskegee's impact is actually greater. I just hope Parson Harper doesn't referee like some boxing refs I know :-) QED

-- Anonymous, May 24, 2004

Now that was funny! Bill Dickens accusing someone of rhetorical excess. You were the one who said I was thinking only of white churches, I just cited two off the top of my head, if you need more for statistical purposes you're smart enough to look them up yourself. Those two and there are several others across the country, proves that not all black churches are liberal or democrat.

You need tell RP about your elder and that stuff because I could care less who you are or where you serve. I simply will not let you misuse my words without response.

Get it. Got it. Good.

Ding!

-- Anonymous, May 24, 2004

Harold, Harold, Harold -

It's disappointing to read that you don't care about the welfare and well being of a fellow AME member. What will I do? Who can I turn to? Where can I go? I think most folks who understand my cyber- personality know the reference to my PE was by design to be tongue-in- cheek. I'll continue this discussion with you in person during one of the many "breaks" at the upcoming General Conference in Indy. Hopefully by then you will have had a chance to regroup and recharge. Who knows, if time permits I might even give you an autograph copy of my latest economic publication :-) QED

-- Anonymous, May 25, 2004

Okay John I promise this is my last word on this thread with Bill I promise!

Bill you just refuse to read what I write. Your welfare or well being was not a subject of my last post.

When we get to general conference I want to give you my book on reading for ultimate comprehension.

God Bless!!

-- Anonymous, May 25, 2004