For centuries, churches have served as sanctuaries. Those who felt vulnerable or persecuted found solace within the Lord’s house, comforted by the idea that they would be shielded from external threats.
Looking back to the time of King David, when his ambitious son fled to the tabernacle, he clung to the altar, believing that the sacred space would offer him safety from his equally ambitious brothers.
Today, places of worship function differently. Even in modern America, individuals seeking refuge from divisive discourse know they can turn to religious institutions. While parishioners may hear sermons on civic responsibility and combating prejudice, churches, mosques, and synagogues have historically been seen as safe havens. These spaces, free from partisanship and political influence, have played significant roles in their congregants’ daily lives.
However, this has changed. The IRS has effectively undermined certain protections, as Federal Law established in 1954 has prohibited tax-exempt religious organizations from endorsing political candidates.
This restriction was initially defended by Lyndon Johnson, who expressed concern about nonprofits supporting opponents. For over 70 years, this law helped prevent the pulpit from becoming a stage for political agendas, but that appears to be shifting. Now, clergy can openly endorse candidates without fearing for their institution’s tax-exempt status.
If this trend continues, communities like mine could be adversely affected.
In conversations about our synagogue, terms like “home” or “family” come up. When our worshippers enter, they seek inspiration rather than political indoctrination. Those interested in politics can engage on social media. At a time when many educational institutions and public entities grapple with ideological divides, churches and synagogues feel increasingly rare as bastions of neutrality.
One congregant raised an important question: “Will rabbis start telling us which candidates to pray for?” Synagogues and churches should prioritize protecting their integrity and fostering character rather than pursuing campaign donations. What prevents donors from channeling tax-deductible gifts into political campaigning? And how do we guard against the potential erosion of moral credibility for the sake of political gain?
Despite the original restrictions not being strictly enforced, the fear of losing tax-exempt status created at least some expectations of nonpartisan conduct.
Legal experts debate if governments hold the right to differentiate between religious organizations and secular nonprofits. Advocacy groups are calling on Congress to either amend or reinstate Johnson’s original amendment, but until then, places of worship must find a way to navigate these changes.
Religious communities, along with their representative groups, need to establish a clear code of conduct. It’s essential to maintain policies that reinforce the divide between spiritual missions and partisan matters. Without adequate safeguards, it’s challenging to prevent worship spaces from straying into divisive territory.
Currently, there are few places where individuals from diverse backgrounds can congregate as seekers rather than as voters—gathering not as a faction but as a community. Synagogues provide one of those rare opportunities. Let’s keep it that way.
