Over the weekend, Gateway Church hoped to guide members in the way they should vote by providing voter guides. After all, who doesn’t need a little political guidance with their spiritual guidance?
Things didn’t go exactly as planned. At some point after many guides had been distributed, someone noticed that the guides were very un-Gateway like. According to a reader, here is what was mixed in with Gateway’s guides:
Below is how Gateway wants members to vote.
This was a pretty elaborate prank. The guides look very similar in these pictures and must have cost a lot to produce. Someone wanted to make a point.
One of the individuals lamenting this turn of events pointed church members to vote.gatewaypeople.com which contains links to the approved Vision America voter guides.
Politicians in Church
Not all Gateway folk are happy with obvious Republican politicking in the church. On a church social media site, two people expressed reservations about the voter guides.
Politicians in church; one can’t escape that at Gateway Church. They even tell you how to vote.
One principle from the page has been violated by the Gateway effort:
Here’s one more point: Don’t align yourself too closely with a political party or a politician. That is unwise because we need to be free to call all political parties and politicians to repentance when they step outside of biblical morality and principle.
It is possible that the anonymous prankster wanted to get across something like this with the alt-voter guide. There is more than one way to look at biblical principles when it comes to politics and policy.
Dr. Throckmorton, see my response to Gwinsida.
For anyone who has spent any amount of time at Gateway there is really nothing Biblical about the entire place unless you think the Bible was created to make the Morris Family insanely wealthy and that God sent his only son to fleece the poor for more and more tithes. Because the creator of heaven and earth needs lots and lots of cash, stocks, bonds, retirement accounts, gold, silver, etc…..
God doesn’t talk to Robert Morris anymore then he talks to my dog.
Not even sure what God they worship at Gateway, the God Greed, The God of Money, the Volcano God.
Great suggestion to start taxing Gateway but with Trump in the Whitehouse even if you did start taxing them, there taxable income would most likely be ZERO. At least maybe Tarrant County could get some property taxes out of the all the tax free parsonages.
THIS IS INCREDIBLE!
GREAT PRANK!
The only thing I can compare it to is the episode of “The Simpsons” where Bart “doctors” the hymnals and the Reverend leads the pewsitters in three verses of “In the Garden of Eden” by “I Ron Butterfly” (i.e. Iron Butterfly’s “In a Gadda da Vida”) before they realize they’ve been had.
I also think that was a subtle L. Ron Hubbard dig as well.
Tax all churches – that will solve this constant problem of church’s meddling in politics. They obviously want to meddle so just tax ’em. ALL because it’s too hard to figure out who is meddling and what constitutes meddling. The Catholic Church with it’s constant drivel about banning birth control is a clear violation of the Constitution’s separations principle and they don’t even try to hide it. TAX them as the businesses all of the churches clearly are.
Not quite sure how taxing churches would solve the problem of “meddling in politics” … seems to me that in that case they would have complete freedom to “meddle” at will.
Prank or not pranked. The church has no business handing out “voters’ guides.”
99% of the time when people mix politics and religion, they bend their religion to suit their politics instead of the other way around.
BTW, how on earth does someone come up with a “Biblical” position on gun control when guns weren’t invented until 1500 years after the Bible was written?
The same way the Demon Locust Plague in the Revelation was “plainly” helicopter gunships packing chemical weapon “stingers” and piloted by long-haired bearded hippies.
“IT’S IN REVELATIONS, PEOPLE!”
— Kent Brockman, “The Simpsons”
This is a great prank now if only someone can hack into the Gateway computers and get a message out on the jumbotrons and see if anyone in the Gateway audience even notices with the bass booming and smoke machines blowing.
Now as for Ted Cruz, look at all the success he was able to amass for himself without being a faithful tither. The complete opposite of all of Gateways ‘theology’
In 2008 the Calvary Chapel church I was attending handed out a “Voters Guide” that was similarly partisan. This is while claiming that they were not taking sides in the election. When I stood up in church to ask where the Democratic voter guide was if you are not taking sides he said he could not find one, “Democrats don’t have them.” Such a lier. We left that church for that and other reasons.
I live in the same county as Calvary Chapel’s Vatican.
When I was listening to local Christianese AM radio, Calvary Chapel DOMINATED the airwaves.
(Like “There Can Be NO Salvation Outside of Calvary Chapel”.)
“Non-Denominational Christian” was synonymous with “Calvary Chapel Clone”.
Calvary Chapel seems to distill down ALL the ways a Born-Again Bible-Believing Fellowship(TM) can go sour into a single package.
This prankster is my new hero.
Having made it a practice to visit every possible Christian church in the areas in which I have lived (for my own edification; I just really enjoy seeing how others do church), I can assure you that even in that small amount of experience, I found that liberal churches are just as partisan as conservative churches, if not more. They may not hand out voter guides, but they get the point across, believe me.
Some churches do this and some don’t. Liberal or conservative, some do and some don’t.
For instance, my church doesn’t have voter guides or literature and you won’t hear a political sermon from the pulpit. I am sure we have people all over the place but the church isn’t involved in party matters.
I have always chosen non-partisan churches. A C&MA church (which a local Dem politician attended), Harvest Bible Chapel (occasionally political, but went back and forth between partisan statements and subverting/confronting the partisan inclinations of the more conservative congregants, particularly on racial issues), and my current EVFree church, which is decidedly non-partisan. But I definitely know the rah-rah Republican wing from my fundy childhood, and I was personally pretty surprised to find that liberal mainline churches were often transparently partisan and vocal in their contempt for (at that time) the Bush administration.
We had Bobby Jindal share his testimony at our church because he came to Christ through contact with members of our church.
Conservatives have to be “pranked” into reading about issues presented in an honest and forthright manner. Notice the church-approved voter guide is full of misleading statements and outright lies. Fundamentalists lying to shepherd their sheep? Reminiscent of the situations in several George Eliot novels – like “Silas Marner” about the Puritains of early American history.
One of the more interesting aspects of this prank is the ridiculous over-reaction to it, coming from pastors. It’s an excellent insight into how power-crazed these folks will become as their brand of Christian Nationalism expands.
The pastors affected are claiming this prank constitutes “copyright violation” and “voter fraud” and they have already hired attorneys and are contacting authorities so they can launch an investigation with the hopes of filing criminal charges and a civil lawsuit.
These are the same people who denounce lawsuits as anti-biblical when they are sued. They have no problem with quoting 1 Corinthians 6, and accusing victims of not engaging in James 1:5 or Mathew 18 if they react in any way to abuse other than total capitulation. Gateway is typically The Church Law Group’s largest client. Robert Morris also has an official group of church and personal body guards called “Gatekeepers” who are current and former federal, state, county and city police officers who pledge their fealty to Robert and Gateway and are rumored to use their offices’ positions and resources to intimidate would-be critics, such as this prankster.
Vision America (VA) is the organization that technically prints and distributes these Voter Guides across the United States. VA is basically an extension of Gateway Church. Their offices are just a few miles west of Gateway’s Corp HQ and the King’s University, all three are just off the 1709 (Southlake Blvd).
The President of Vision America is John Graves, an attorney who was “ordained” by Gateway Apostle and founding Elder Jack Hayford. Both Robert Morris and John Graves sit on the Board of Jack Hayford Ministries, which is now under the covering of The King’s University, owned and operated by Gateway Church.
Like Franklin Graham recently did with his father’s charities, Graves had Vision America reclassified as an “Association of Churches” so that he would no longer have to file ANY paperwork with the government, therefore concealing who funds Vision America and how much the VA leaders are paid. The IRS is allowing an organization whose core mission is to mobilize right wing voters to operate 100% tax free as well as giving them the freedom to conceal their sources for funding and how they use those funds. Heellllooo dark money.
If it were possible to access this highly secretive information, we would see that that VA is currently funded mainly by Gateway and that they basically operate as an extension/ministry arm of Gateway. Gateway is one of the largest leaders pushing the hardest on the Christian Nationalist front. Gateway currently has the most evangelical leaders inside Trump’s inner “faith circle”.
In an interview with CBN, VA President John Graves says that they will be charging the prankster with “copyright violations. If it’s found out to be from Beto’s campaign, it’s a violation of FEC, under federal law. There’s fraud. There’s all kinds of other issues, uh, we’re having some attorneys that are specialists in election law and voter fraud, uh, look into it as well.”
The first action taken by the pastors affected was to hire lawyers to beat the snot out of this prankster and make every effort to see them rotting in jail – just like Jesus would do. TITHE dollars are going to fund this jack-booted over-reaction to a harmless, funny prank. How is that promoting the Gospel, let alone helping those in need? Notice that Graves never once mentions the name Gateway. He doesn’t want Gateway tithers to realize these expensive legal actions will ultimately be paid for by them.
Graves also sees no irony in his following statement, “It’s just an attempt to deceive. But really, probably the nastiest part of this, is that they snuck secretly inside of churches. We don’t know how many are doing this. We don’t know if it’s just in this state or other states, but they snuck inside churches to deceive church members. And I’ve been around this over 25 years. I’ve never seen or heard anything like that. So, uh, it’s pretty appalling.”
First off, as a fringe Church of Foursquare ordained Pentecostal Pastor, why is Graves ruling out that this might be an act of God? I’ve heard about some of the nutty miracles that Gateway claims have occurred on their campuses and this one wouldn’t be that far-fetched for them.
More importantly, the entire core of this prank, based on the selective rewording of the guide, seems to be about demonstrating how manipulative the data is in these guides. I’m not convinced that the prankster is even pro-Beto, let alone a member from his campaign. I think the prankster simply took advantage of an opportunity to make a point and this year’s voter guide happened to be focused exclusively on supporting Cruz.
O’Rourke has forbidden any negative attacks and he isn’t stupid. It’s outrageous and irresponsible for Vision America to suggest, in the absence of any proof whatsoever, that this may be Beto O’Rourke personally engaging in voter fraud. We’ve seen from VA’s own framing in their voter guides, how serious their efforts are when it comes to “attempting to deceive.”
In the end, this prankster was EDUCATING people, not “sneaking into churches to deceive church members”. C’mon John. Deceiving church members is your patron Robert Morris’ job, not the prankster’s.
One of the more interesting aspects of this prank is the ridiculous over-reaction to it, coming from pastors. It’s an excellent insight into how power-crazed these folks will become as their brand of Christian Nationalism expands.
The pastors affected are claiming this prank constitutes “copyright violation” and “voter fraud” and they have already hired attorneys and are contacting authorities so they can launch an investigation with the hopes of filing criminal charges and a civil lawsuit.
These are the same people who denounce lawsuits as anti-biblical when they are sued. They have no problem with quoting 1 Corinthians 6, and accusing victims of not engaging in James 1:5 or Mathew 18 if they react in any way to abuse other than total capitulation. Gateway is typically The Church Law Group’s largest client. Robert Morris also has an official group of church and personal body guards called “Gatekeepers” who are current and former federal, state, county and city police officers who pledge their fealty to Robert and Gateway and are rumored to use their offices’ positions and resources to intimidate would-be critics, such as this prankster.
Vision America (VA) is the organization that technically prints and distributes these Voter Guides across the United States. VA is basically an extension of Gateway Church. Their offices are just a few miles west of Gateway’s Corp HQ and the King’s University, all three are just off the 1709 (Southlake Blvd).
The President of Vision America is John Graves, an attorney who was “ordained” by Gateway Apostle and founding Elder Jack Hayford. Both Robert Morris and John Graves sit on the Board of Jack Hayford Ministries, which is now under the covering of The King’s University, owned and operated by Gateway Church.
Like Franklin Graham recently did with his father’s charities, Graves had Vision America reclassified as an “Association of Churches” so that he would no longer have to file ANY paperwork with the government, therefore concealing who funds Vision America and how much the VA leaders are paid. The IRS is allowing an organization whose core mission is to mobilize right wing voters to operate 100% tax free as well as giving them the freedom to conceal their sources for funding and how they use those funds. Heellllooo dark money.
If it were possible to access this highly secretive information, we would see that that VA is currently funded mainly by Gateway and that they basically operate as an extension/ministry arm of Gateway. Gateway is one of the largest leaders pushing the hardest on the Christian Nationalist front. Gateway currently has the most evangelical leaders inside Trump’s inner “faith circle”.
In an interview with CBN, VA President John Graves says that they will be charging the prankster with “copyright violations. If it’s found out to be from Beto’s campaign, it’s a violation of FEC, under federal law. There’s fraud. There’s all kinds of other issues, uh, we’re having some attorneys that are specialists in election law and voter fraud, uh, look into it as well.”
The first action taken by the pastors affected was to hire lawyers to beat the snot out of this prankster and make every effort to see them rotting in jail – just like Jesus would do. TITHE dollars are going to fund this jack-booted over-reaction to a harmless, funny prank. How is that promoting the Gospel, let alone helping those in need? Notice that Graves never once mentions the name Gateway. He doesn’t want Gateway tithers to realize these expensive legal actions will ultimately be paid for by them.
Graves also sees no irony in his following statement, “It’s just an attempt to deceive. But really, probably the nastiest part of this, is that they snuck secretly inside of churches. We don’t know how many are doing this. We don’t know if it’s just in this state or other states, but they snuck inside churches to deceive church members. And I’ve been around this over 25 years. I’ve never seen or heard anything like that. So, uh, it’s pretty appalling.”
First off, as a fringe Church of Foursquare ordained Pentecostal Pastor, why is Graves ruling out that this might be an act of God? I’ve heard about some of the nutty miracles that Gateway claims have occurred on their campuses and this one wouldn’t be that far-fetched for them.
More importantly, the entire core of this prank, based on the selective rewording of the guide, seems to be about demonstrating how manipulative the data is in these guides. I’m not convinced that the prankster is even pro-Beto, let alone a member from his campaign. I think the prankster simply took advantage of an opportunity to make a point and this year’s voter guide happened to be focused exclusively on supporting Cruz.
O’Rourke has forbidden any negative attacks and he isn’t stupid. It’s outrageous and irresponsible for Vision America to suggest, in the absence of any proof whatsoever, that this may be Beto O’Rourke personally engaging in voter fraud. We’ve seen from VA’s own framing in their voter guides, how serious their efforts are when it comes to “attempting to deceive.”
In the end, this prankster was EDUCATING people, not “sneaking into churches to deceive church members”. C’mon John. Deceiving church members is your patron Robert Morris’ job, not the prankster’s.
http://www1.cbn.com/content/dirty-tricks-fake-voter-guides-distributed-christian-voters-texas
This reminds me of the time I was pranking the comment cards at the NRH campus and Dopeland had Stokes running around checking all the comment cards before the show.
I highly recommend that if you are a family member being dragged to Gateway. Its a cheap an easy way to mess with them.
If the prankster is ever discovered, I suggest they go with a fair use satire argument.
If Robert Morris is ever discovered maybe he can go with a plea bargain.
Here’s the link https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1828.pdf
If you google can churches support political candidates this comes up. Maybe someone should report Gateway Church to the IRS and bring their tax exempt status into question. Maybe it would save Mr. Graves from making a fool of himself in court.
“Issue Advocacy vs . Political Campaign Intervention
Like other Section 501(c)(3) organizations, some churches and religious organi- zations take positions on public policy issues, including issues that divide candi- dates in an election for public office. However, 501(c)(3) organizations must avoid any issue advocacy that functions as political campaign intervention. Even if a statement does not expressly tell an audience to vote for or against a specific can- didate, an organization delivering the statement is at risk of violating the political campaign intervention prohibition if there is any message favoring or opposing
a candidate. A statement can identify a candidate not only by stating the candi- date’s name but also by other means such as showing a picture of the candidate, referring to political party affiliations or other distinctive features of a candidate’s platform or biography. All the facts and circumstances need to be considered to determine if the advocacy is political campaign intervention.
Key factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include:
n whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office, n whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval for one or more
candidates’ positions or actions,
n whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election,
n whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election,
n whether the issue addressed in the communication has been raised as an issue distinguishing candidates for a given office,
n whether the communication is part of an ongoing series of communications by the organization on the same issue that are made independent of the timing of any election, and
n whether the timing of the communication and identification of the candidate are related to a non-electoral event such as a scheduled vote on specific legislation by an officeholder who also happens to be a candidate for public office.
A communication is particularly at risk of political campaign intervention when it makes reference to candidates or voting in a specific upcoming election. Nevertheless, the communication must still be considered in context before arriving at any conclusions.”
As GWInsida points out, Gateway is blatantly lying about Beto O’Rourke. The Gateway Church gospel in action: “Lying is Not Merely Acceptable Here, It’s Our Preferable Behavior of Choice.” This is how history will remember Gateway Church.
History won’t remember Gateway at all, as it appears the future will be lousy with far worse. This is only the beginning unless we all wake up and deal with it, most of all the Church itself.
This is incredible. I salute whoever did this. It had to take quite a bit of effort. Voter Guide distribution at Gateway would fall under the Media Dept which is run by Lawrence Swicegood. Swicegood is also the man who heads up Gateway Church’s Crisis Management team. So his team gets to help create the crisis, then turn around and panic and resolve it. And there was plenty of panic at Gateway this weekend.
Originally, Gateway had planned to publish a statement Sunday afternoon, but after discussions with their lawyers realized that would only attract more attention to the issue.
This prank is quite sophisticated on many levels. It mainly points out how utterly manipulative these guides are. The one Gateway intended to hand out shows Ted Cruz being the most biblical candidate on 9 out of 9 issues, while Beto O’Rourke scores 0 out of 9 – similar to their Voter Guide which showed Trump being the most biblical on 13 of 13 issues and Hillary scoring 0 out of 13. By simply wording the issues a bit differently, the prankster easily exposed Ted’s positions as being decidedly un-Christlike on all 13 issues.
They also mischaracterize Beto’s stances. For instance, they claim that Beto “supports” allowing men to shower in women’s showers, then offer as their sole proof a single Tweet by Beto that says “Bathroom bill to cost Texas “$3.3 billion per year as well as the loss of over 35,600 full-time equivalent (FTE) jobs” This so-called bathroom bill doesn’t address bathrooms, locker rooms or showers. That is lying and is a violation of one of the basic Ten Commandments.
Evangelicals have been strutting about, patting themselves on the back for their clever framing on these guides that helped usher Trump into office as the more biblical candidate. It was great so long as they were able to manipulate their congregations with misleading information, but they get totally bent out of shape when someone does the exact same thing, but merely skews the questions and answers to favor Ted’s opponent. You have to love the hypocrisy.
Behind Christian leaders are the Council of Foreign Relatioins who claim Rick Warren and Richard Land. On the other side is the Council of National Policy with a who’s who of evangelical leaders. Nikki Haley spoke at the latter 5 days before resigning. These organizations have too much sway in our church leadership. Most leaders keep their membership secret but get their marching orders from them. Members in the pew don’t realize how much they are influenced by outside forces.
It really is astonishing how much power brokering goes on behind the scenes and how much is carefully concealed from the flock. Church members are the ones funding many of these activities and they have no clue that this where their tithes are going.
For instance, how many people at Gateway know that the purveyors of this highly skewed GOP Voter Guides, Vision America, is HQd minutes from Gateway and mainly funded by them? How many know that Robert Morris and other Gateway Pastors keep sneaking off to the White House on private jets so they can play big-wig at Trump White House gatherings? How many know that Gateway continues to fund Franklin Graham’s midterm Decision America tour? That was supposed to be a one off deal strictly for the 2016 Presidential election, yet Franklin continues to stump for political gain across the U.S and Gateway continues to help fund this?
Jim Garlow just announced he is abandoning his flock in San Diego so he can move to DC to infuse Christianity into the House and Senate full time and his wife is going to the UN to do the same there in NYC. Naturally, he is keeping his posh San Diego home, but he won’t be returning for weekends at his own church. His tithers will be the ones paying for these three homes. So Christian Nationalists are seizing this Trump moment to go global with their movement.
And the White House well continues to get more polluted. Jim Bakker claims he is
close with President Trump and has just been called by unspecified DC power players to go to “Worshington” to do more work to help Trump save the country. People assume he is washed-up but his wife is starting her own new talk show and they are creating a home shopping network to sell Christian goods; not just the prepper crap, but important stuff like cheap 40 cent plastic signs that say “Keep Christ in Christmas” – on special for $15.
Jim Bakker has extremely strong ties to Paula White, Trump’s official pastor (who else but Pastor Barbie?). They go way back to his pre-prison inmate days. Paula is the one keeping this pathetic criminal scam artist in the DC loop and helping to turbo charge his return to televangelism prominence. Paula claims that Trump was raised in a deeply religious home where his mother wandered the mansion constantly mumbling prayers and even as an adult Donald constantly watched Christian television. He can’t get enough of it. White claims that as a younger man Trump was a huge fan of Jim Bakker. Jim is a bumbling idiot and is now being given a seat at the table to influence the WH. This is really getting out of hand guys.
I do know that President Trump has had an ongoing close relationship with Pastor Mullins at Christ Fellowship. My personal opinion is there are lies on both sides and it is documented. My concern in the USA is that many people are into human worship when it comes to our politicans and it extends to our Christian leaders. We need to have a healthy skepticism and ask a lot of questions. No Christian should have blind loyality to a human. Christians need to stop thinking the government will solve all our problems and get up off the couch to be a solution themselves.
Robert Morris sneaking off to DC whilst he is recovering from his illness and can’t preach? Hmmm….
He, ive been trying to contact you. Would you like to make connection? If so, respond and I’ll attempt to reestablish contact through Dr. T. Thanks! Botswani
This is a classic Hoax to Make a Point.
Churches do not belong in politics. This is what happens when you park your brain at the door of the church and let your minister do your thinking for you.
No American voter should allow anyone to make up their mind for them. This is the problem in our country. People are too lazy to research things for themselves.
Probably not a very defensible posture in light of the church/faith-centric nature of the Civil Rights movement.
While individual clergymen played an important role, the Civil Rights movement was far more about social justice than politics. Not quite the same as encouraging your congregation to vote for Republicans.
I assume you’d be just as opposed to congregants being told to vote for Democrats. If so, I’m with you on both counts.
Yes, but the problem, as you will likely agree, is that one leads to the other.
*tartly* White Evangelicals were noticeably absent from the Civil Rights struggle. I believe they were alternately worrying about uppity black people who might want to go to their white churches or flatly standing on the church steps to keep black people out.
Is that right? How do you know that?
Go review the names of the pastors involved. You’ll not find white Evangelicals. I’d also suggest this article from The Gospel Coalition.
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justin-taylor/jim-crow-civil-rights-and-southern-white-evangelicals-a-historians-forum-carolyn-dupont/
That’s pretty interesting, and I probably should do some reading on that. However, the statement I objected to was, “Churches do not belong in politics.” I still don’t think that’s a defensible position to take, given the involvement of Christians in the advancement of rights. What white evangelicals did in a certain area of the country is not the entirety of the issue. Not even close.
The Church was involved on both sides of that movement (I don’t have proper data to what extent on each side). This is perhaps fitting since the Church had so much to do with the original problem. I think the bigger question here is, how on earth could there ever have been a question of civil rights as far as the Church is concerned. If the Church can get this so wrong, how trustworthy is she in matters of morality? That’s not a condemnation, but a serious lament.
When I hear things like, “…perhaps fitting since the Church had so much to do with the original problem,” I have to object, since slavery is an ancient, ubiquitous practice. Western Christianized nations (and in particular the white ruling classes of those nations) were the first in the history of the world to say, “We are not forced to ban slavery because we are at the end of a gun or in the clutches of a mob. We WANT to ban it because it is unjust and abhorrent, and we hate it.”
I understand, but when I hear things like “Probably not a very defensible posture in light of the church/faith-centric nature of the Civil Rights movement,” I have to point out that the Church provided a basis for the treatment of Africans as less than human, and a defense of the institution in the American Colonies/United States. It was a common refrain that interfering with the institution was akin to interfering with the providence of God in that slavery was, in effect, the path to salvation for Africans.
Frederick Douglas had this to say:
“Between the Christianity of this land and the Christianity of Christ, I recognize the widest possible difference – so wide that to receive the one as good, pure, and holy, is of necessity to reject the other as bad, corrupt, and wicked. To be the friend of the one is of necessity to be the enemy of the other. I love the pure, peaceable, and impartial Christianity of Christ; I therefore hate the corrupt, slave-holding, women-whipping, cradle-plundering, partial and hypocritical Christianity of this land. Indeed, I can see no reason but the most deceitful one for calling the religion of this land Christianity…”
Yes, some in the (mostly non-mainstream) churches did come to the conclusion that slavery was wrong and did not reflect the idea that all people were equal and valued in the eyes of God. However, 620,000 soldiers died in the Civil War – that’s a pretty big gun. The idea that this change was not a violent one is absurd.
I’m not ignoring the part Christians played in the initial abolition of slavery or the modern civil rights movement in this country. But neither can we ignore the systemic participation the Church has played in the institution at all stages in history, including the time between the US Civil War and the 1960s. And back to my original comment, this makes it only fitting that the Church helped to work for the civil rights of African Americans.
When I talk about the abolition movement in the West and the place of faith and church in it, I am (necessarily, I think) definitely rolling into that William Wilberforce and abolition in Great Britain. The warped Western theology in support of slavery and racial heirarchy, and the efforts expended to defend it, are without a doubt the worst black eye on the Christian church and something to be ashamed of.
I understand, but when I hear things like “Probably not a very defensible posture in light of the church/faith-centric nature of the Civil Rights movement,” I have to point out that the Church provided a basis for the treatment of Africans as less than human, and a defense of the institution in the American Colonies/United States. It was a common refrain that interfering with the institution was akin to interfering with the providence of God in that slavery was, in effect, the path to salvation for Africans.
Frederick Douglas had this to say:
“Between the Christianity of this land and the Christianity of Christ, I recognize the widest possible difference – so wide that to receive the one as good, pure, and holy, is of necessity to reject the other as bad, corrupt, and wicked. To be the friend of the one is of necessity to be the enemy of the other. I love the pure, peaceable, and impartial Christianity of Christ; I therefore hate the corrupt, slave-holding, women-whipping, cradle-plundering, partial and hypocritical Christianity of this land. Indeed, I can see no reason but the most deceitful one for calling the religion of this land Christianity…”
Yes, some in the (mostly non-mainstream) churches did come to the conclusion that slavery was wrong and did not reflect the idea that all people were equal and valued in the eyes of God. However, 620,000 soldiers died in the Civil War – that’s a pretty big gun. The idea that this change was not a violent one is absurd.
I’m not ignoring the part Christians played in the initial abolition of slavery or the modern civil rights movement in this country. But neither can we ignore the systemic participation the Church has played in the institution at all stages in history, including the time between the US Civil War and the 1960s. And back to my original comment, this makes it only fitting that the Church helped to work for the civil rights of African Americans.
As I have been saying for years, politics is a more fundamental force than religious belief in most people.
I’m not sure what is more distressing, that the Church is giving political guidance at all, or the substance of the guidance it is giving. Talk about losing the moral high ground.
Well… politics often addresses matters of morality, directly or indirectly. The church *should* speak about matters of morality.
Would it have been appropriate for a church in 1930s Germany to address the political situation of the time? Was supporting Hitler a sin, and should a German church of the day have treated it as such?
Obviously our situation today is much less extreme than that faced by 1930s German churches, but there are many moral questions which politicians will be addressing, and is it not appropriate for the church to have something to say about the matter?
Of course it isn’t appropriate, and it is against the law for that church to be a tax-free entity. We do not need man-made religion, or any supernatural crazy talk, to have morality. As far as morality goes, churches have nothing to say on the matter, and they violate good morality with constant lying to credulous people, and in many cases, encouraging bigotry.
You are conflating the substance of what they say with whether they should say anything. Of course some of the things some churches say on matters of morality and other issues is simply wrong. That doesn’t necessarily mean they shouldn’t say anything. Rather, it means that they should correct what they are saying so that what they say lines up with what is right.
I also never argued that one needs to be religious to be moral.
The current U.S. tax code is also not relevant to the broader question of whether it’s appropriate for a church to address political matters. Maybe it means an American church should cease to be a tax-free entity, but the U.S. tax code doesn’t apply to a church in, say, Canada.
But, again, in 1930s Germany, would you argue that a church should stay silent on political matters? Should such a church consider it sinful to support the Nazis? There was a clear matter of right and wrong. Should not the church speak out for the right in such a case?
What about a church in the American South in the early 1800s? Should not the church have had something to say about slavery? Many such churches said some things that were simply wrong on the subject, but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t have said anything at all.
There are other issues where the question of right and wrong isn’t as clear. Pick gun control, for example; there are moral arguments to be made on both sides. But the church can still help its members understand how Biblical principles apply to the various moral questions, thus aiding them in making their own decisions.
The fact that this is not always done right doesn’t mean it should not be done at all.
As I understand it, the Church is supposed to be a light by bringing the Good News to the world, and living in a way that puts others first.
I don’t remember encountering Godwin’s Law so early in a discussion, but there it is. Accordingly, I’ll leave this alone.
There is a massive difference between discussing what Christian scriptures have to say about moral issues, and basically telegraphing instructions to members to vote as the Church leadership wants them to. I would also submit that those original voter guides are designed less with morality in mind and more with political (even culture war) manipulation.
If members are trusted to take in those scriptural teachings and then make up their own minds on civic matters, then they don’t need a cheat sheet, certainly not one so obviously constructed to coral them in a certain direction. Why not create something akin to Ballotpedia (or just point to that https://ballotpedia.org) which presents the candidates and ballot measures in detail, with a wide range of resources all readily available to show the candidates views, voting record, editorials on why some agree or disagree with them, etc.
The bottom line is that organizations such as Gateway are a very real danger to our democracy. They are consolidating political power into a religious nationalism that could not be further from the intent of the Founders, or for that matter, any view of Jesus I am aware of. The fact that they represent their own increasingly immoral power structure only makes it that much worse. They do all this under an untouchable cloak of religion, and the histrionic cry of persecution. There is nothing moral about it.
Don’t get me wrong. This particular voter guide is not what I believe a church should be doing. It went beyond matters of morality, and it did nothing to help people understand how Biblical principles apply to the issues at hand. Rather, I’m arguing the general principle that the church *must* address political matters when issues of right and wrong are at stake – and even when there’s not a clear right and wrong, it can help people understand how Biblical principles apply to the issues.
“the Church is supposed to be a light by bringing the Good News to the world, and living in a way that puts others first.”
We’re supposed to be living in a way that pleases God; putting others first is a major part of it, but it’s broader than that. But even the matter of putting others first has implications for the political sphere, does it not?
“I don’t remember encountering Godwin’s Law so early in a discussion, but there it is. Accordingly, I’ll leave this alone.”
You’re dodging the question. I wasn’t calling anyone a Nazi. Is it appropriate for a church to oppose an evil government, or an evil policy? Political decisions are not always morally neutral. In the 1800s, there were churches that opposed slavery; were they right to do so, or, because it was a political issue, should they have been silent on the subject? Is either party promoting policies with moral implications today? (I would argue both major parties have some moral problems.) Are there really no current political hot topics where moral considerations should influence our decisions?
“There is a massive difference between discussing what Christian scriptures have to say about moral issues, and basically telegraphing instructions to members to vote as the Church leadership wants them to. I would also submit that those original voter guides are designed less with morality in mind and more with political (even culture war) manipulation.”
Again, I’m not saying that this example of political involvement by the church was entirely appropriate and right. Rather, I’m saying that the general principle that the church shouldn’t get into political matters is not right.
And it terms of specific candidates, a church should be very slow to advocate a specific candidate, but it is entirely appropriate to say “this policy is evil, here is a Biblical explanation of why it is evil, and this candidate supports this policy”.
“The bottom line is that organizations such as Gateway are a very real danger to our democracy.”
Again, I’m not arguing for this specific example of political involvement by a church. I’m talking about the general principle.
You don’t have to call someone a Nazi to invoke Godwin’s law.
The problem is that one can use the morality link to justify all sorts of nationalism in the Church. I’m not arguing that the Church has no place in discussions of morality, though I do think it has lost much of its effectiveness as a participant. The point is that one can teach morality and let members decide from that what they think of this or that candidate. Democracy and theocracy are antithetical – the Founders knew this.
In a secular government, we all have to allow for things with which we don’t necessarily agree. One might need to err on the side of freedom rather than one’s own idea of morality on some issues because others have their own values on that. If we start dictating which leaders are “acceptable” to this or that church, or this or that belief system, you end up with a tyrannical imposition of what is allowable. You also end up with a church that is a political party. We are basically there already.
Looking at the original voter guides above, and just about any I’ve seen coming from churches over the years, it is obvious we are talking about a desire to gain power, not morality.
Again, you’re talking specifics about this voter guide and the current religious and political situation in the U.S. I’m talking about general principles.
“The problem is that one can use the morality link to justify all sorts of nationalism in the Church.”
That would be a misuse of the church’s appropriate role in the conversation. The fact that something can be done wrong doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be done at all.
“I’m not arguing that the Church has no place in discussions of morality, though I do think it has lost much of its effectiveness as a participant.”
Again, you’re talking specifics of the current situation, rather than general principles of what should be.
“The point is that one can teach morality and let members decide from that what they think of this or that candidate.”
Often, yes. But what about when the main issue in an election is a clearly evil policy that one candidate or the other supports? In that situation, is it not right for the church to rebuke a particular politician and say that it would be wrong to vote for him?
I’m not talking about policies where there’s moral arguments to be made on both sides (which is the majority of the time). I’m talking about issues where right and wrong are extremely clear.
“In a secular government, we all have to allow for things with which we don’t necessarily agree. One might need to err on the side of freedom rather than one’s own idea of morality on some issues because others have their own values on that.”
I don’t disagree. I also don’t believe that this contradicts what I’m saying. A church can be a moral voice on political issues while accepting it won’t win all the time, and while accepting that there is (and should be) a difference between what is immoral and what is illegal.
“If we start dictating which leaders are “acceptable” to this or that church, or this or that belief system, you end up with a tyrannical imposition of what is allowable.”
In general, churches shouldn’t support specific politicians. But I believe it’s entirely appropriate to say “this is evil”, both about a policy and about politicians who actively promote a particular policy.
“Looking at the original voter guides above, and just about any I’ve seen coming from churches over the years, it is obvious we are talking about a desire to gain power, not morality.”
Again, you’re talking about this specific situation, and more broadly about the American religious-political situation, not about general principles that would apply globally across all time.
The OP is about the voter guide, so yes I’m talking about that. However, I also addressed the wider issue when I said “I’m not arguing that the Church has no place in discussions of morality.”
The Catholic Church was in cahoots with the Nazis mostly to avoid the German military from using church buildings for military operations. The Church didn’t care what was happening to democracy or the Jews. Just like our own Evangelical churches do not care what is happening to democracy or common decency here at home.
Again, I’m not arguing that the church *has* addressed political matters properly. I’m arguing against the claim that it never should.
I believe the church should address political matters whenever Biblical principles apply to political decisions. Sometimes that’s a clear-cut “this policy is evil”. Other times it’s more nuanced.
I am soooo glad someone did this!