Dec 07 2012
Washington, D.C. – The Supreme Court announced today that it will grant review of two cases regarding same-gender marriage: Hollingsworth v. Perry, the California Proposition 8 case, and United States v. Windsor, which questions the constitutionality of Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Interfaith Alliance joined an amicus brief in Windsor supporting the overturning of Section 3 and opposing Proposition 8, both on religious freedom grounds. In response to the Court’s announcement, Interfaith Alliance President Rev. Dr. C. Welton Gaddy issued the following statement:
I applaud the Court’s decision to review two important cases on the issue of marriage equality for same-gender couples. DOMA has denied same-gender couples the federal recognition and benefits allowed to all other married Americans for far too long. In a country that guarantees both religious freedom and “justice for all,” the laws of our land must be based on what is fair and equal, not simply on the religious views of any one faith community. The Court’s decision can be a promising step both for religious freedom and for marriage equality.
By granting review of these cases, the Court has created an opportunity for our nation to take a major step toward being on the right side of history and fulfilling the intent of the Constitution. I hope that we will see the Highest Court in the land deal a major blow to DOMA and affirm the 9th Circuit Court’s decision in the Proposition 8 case next year.
Nov 07 2012
Washington, D.C. – Interfaith Alliance President Rev. Dr. C. Welton Gaddy issued the following statement today following President Obama’s reelection:
"The results are in, and we now know that President Barack Obama will be spending another four years in the White House. He is to be congratulated as is Governor Mitt Romney for engaging in a process at the heart of our democracy and providing us with the opportunity to make our voices heard. As we look toward the president’s second term and the convening of a new Congress, we also know that the issues we care about are every bit as important today as they were yesterday, and we have no intention of letting up on our work to protect religious freedom for every American."
"The American people have maintained the status quo by reelecting the president, as well as by maintaining Democratic control of the Senate and Republican control of the House. But, voters also challenged the status quo by sending a clear message to Democrats and Republicans alike, demanding that all of us work together to solve our nation’s problems. Most important now is not advancing a partisan agenda but demonstrating a patriotic focus on job creation and ensuring our national security. Of course, pursuing those priorities should not stop our elected leaders from making greater progress in defense of religious freedom. The president’s first term saw great successes, including the passage of anti-hate crimes legislation, the end of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, and a modicum of progress on reforming the White House Office of Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships."
"But progress must still be made to end the bullying epidemic in our schools, prevent hiring discrimination, hold accountable houses of worship that violated the law during the election by endorsing candidates from the pulpit, and ensure marriage equality for all. On that final point, the passage of pro-marriage equality ballot initiatives in Maryland, Maine and Washington State, and the defeat of an anti-marriage equality amendment in Minnesota, as well as the vote to retain Iowa Supreme Court Justice David Wiggins should refuel the energy of all working to achieve that goal."
"With the election concluded, we remain a country almost equally divided in our devotion to two different visions of what this nation should be and become. President Obama was chosen to lead us in facing the continuing challenge to bridge the cavernous divisions among us and work with all of us to bring our nation back together. Interfaith Alliance will join the president and all committed to engaging that challenge responsibly and actively."
Nov 06 2012
November 6, 2012
Commissioner Douglas H. Shulman
1111 Constitution Ave. NW
Washington, D.C. 20224-0002
Dear Commissioner Shulman:
I am writing to you regarding the Internal Revenue Service’s tax audits of houses of worship which have violated the law prohibiting pulpit politicking by non-profit organizations. As a minister who serves a Baptist congregation in Louisiana and the president of the national Interfaith Alliance, I have been deeply disturbed by the disproportionate role religion has played during recent election cycles. Specifically, I am appalled by the ever increasing frequency with which clergy around the country are endorsing or condemning candidates —that this blatant and intentional law breaking goes unchallenged by the IRS. The situation in which we find ourselves is unlike anything I have seen in my decades of ministry and this threat to both the integrity of religion and the vitality of politics must end.
I understand that a 2009 court case, United States v. Living Word Christian Center, required that the IRS clarify its rules on which officials are able to authorize such audits. However, the overwhelming consensus seems to be that there has been no action — either to make these clarifications or act on houses of worship violating the law. If steps have been taken to put a regime in place that is empowered to challenge the clergy who are intent on entangling themselves with electoral politics, I hope that you will soon make them public.
I want to be clear: I write to share my concerns because of my interest in protecting the interests of both religion and democracy. The prohibition against pulpit endorsements protects my fellow clergy members and me just as much as it protects our democratic system. As a defender of religious freedom I can unequivocally say such rules protect, rather than infringe upon my freedom. My prophetic mission to speak truth to power and educate my congregation on social justice issues important to our faith, is made possible in part because by being tax exempt, my church is free from government oversight and entanglement.
Furthermore, this is an issue that we know is not completely drawn with partisan lines. Though most of the high profile examples involve clergy stumping for Republican candidates — as in the case of the Alliance Defending Freedom’s so-called Pulpit Freedom Sunday — a recent survey from the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life found that 40 percent of black Protestants said their clergy have discussed their support for President Obama in church.
This election cycle is almost behind us, but I hope that you will give priority to putting the necessary rules and personnel in place before the 2014 Midterm Elections, to investigate houses of worship that flaunt the law and endorse political candidates. We have two years to stem this tide and I hope we can do so before our next election cycle, or the inaction of the IRS will only encourage more and more clergy to act in such an unlawful and unethical manner.
Rev. Dr. C. Welton Gaddy
Nov 05 2012
November 5, 2012
His Eminence Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan
1011 First Avenue
New York, NY 10022
Dear Cardinal Dolan:
As a Baptist minister and as a patriotic American, I have been deeply disturbed by the disproportionate role religion has played during recent election cycles; it is unlike anything I have seen in my decades of ministry. Indeed, at times, the entanglement between religion and politics has seemed to threaten both the integrity of religion and the vitality of politics. Recent appeals to the Catholic flock that have been or will be read in churches in several states may not have crossed a legal boundary, but I am a firm believer that what is ethical is every bit as important as what is legal and in that respect, a line has been crossed.
In the most recent example, Bishop Daniel Jenky of Peoria, IL, mandated a letter be read in every parish in his diocese that not only distorts the truth, but calls on parishioners to vote. While he does not explicitly tell Illinois parishioners for whom they should vote, his call to vote comes after explaining how sinful it would be to support the policies of the President and “current majority” of the Senate, making it rather clear for whom he believes a Catholic should vote. One week prior, Bishop David Laurin Ricken of Green Bay, WI, posted a letter (also shared in church bulletins) noting “some candidates and one party” have included in their platform positions contrary to the teachings of the Church and “to vote for someone in favor of these positions means you could…put your own soul in jeopardy.” Bishop Ricken’s letter clearly implies which of the political parties he believes promotes “intrinsically evil” policies.
By contrast, Chancellor of the Archdiocese of Cincinnati, Rev. Steve Angi, wrote a letter in a different vein, one that I hope you will support becoming the norm of how the Catholic Church speaks to its flock about elections. Chancellor Angi reminded church leaders in his diocese that not only does the Church “not wish to engage in political activity” but that it is important to not speak or act in a way “that could be construed as endorsement.”
I hope that you agree with me in thinking that religion should never be used as a political tool and clergy should never abuse their pulpit by turning it into a political stump, rather than a platform to inspire, comfort and educate their flock about the faith. A church pulpit is the nexus of Christian beliefs and contemporary issues. The pulpit’s authority is compromised if those who stand in it and preach from it claim a divine authority for
endorsements or condemnations of candidates – even when such statements are cloaked by an appeal to religious liberty. I believe in and will defend the right of clergy to speak to their flock about the challenges facing our nation – including the Catholic Church’s perspective on women’s health care – but that does not and should not include using the pulpit to push a partisan agenda.
People of faith can of course, should they so choose, turn to their spiritual leaders for moral grounding as they contemplate the election. However, it is for each individual voter to make his or her own decision. As the president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, I hope you will act to ensure that the messages are shared in parishes around the nation – and by you yourself – do not declare or even imply which candidate the faithful should vote for; because, what is ethical is just as important as what is legal.
Rev. Dr. Welton Gaddy