New Quaker Notebook

How to say no to IRS ire. As a result of an anti-war sermon preached by emeritus rector Rev George Regas at All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena, CA, on October 31, 2004, the IRS is investigating the Southern California church for tax-law violations. In the offending sermon, against the invasion of Iraq, Regas imagines a debate pitting Jesus against both President Bush and Sen John F. Kerry:

At the outset, the retired pastor told his listeners that "I don't intend to tell you how to vote." Then he went on to describe Jesus as deeply saddened by the war in Iraq and poverty in the United States.

"Mr. President, your doctrine of preemptive war is a failed doctrine," he imagined Jesus telling Bush. Later in the sermon, he envisioned Jesus as saying: "Shame on all those conservative politicians in the nation's Congress and in state legislatures who have for years so proudly proclaimed their love for children when they were only fetuses—but ignored their needs after they were born."

The morning after Regas spoke, an article in the Los Angeles Times called his sermon a "searing indictment of the Bush administration's policies in Iraq." On June 9, the IRS sent an initial letter to the church, citing the newspaper article.¹

In return, though, the 3,500-member Episcopal congregation has gone very public with the audit, eliciting much support from an array of cross-political religious organizations, and has even gone so far as to hire a "heavy-hitting Washington law firm" in its effort to repel these invaders of free-range Christian attitudes to war and political sensibilities. If the IRS determines that All Saints Church has violated the rules governing political campaign activities, it may remove the church's tax exemption.²

And we're all going to pretend that this is, oh, a noble issue about free speech, religious liberty, constitutional protections, and blah blah. It's about none of these things, really. And it's not even necessarily an American thing. People have been trying to figure out the best strategies for tax avoidance for as long as there have been taxes. The US tax code permits nonprofit organizations the opportunity to avoid federal tax through proper filing and, once approved by the IRS, the usual constraints of maintaining that status. This is about preserving the tax-exempt status for All Saints Church.

One, the Pasadena church doesn't want to have to pay any income taxes. Two, it also wants its leadership to be able to speak freely in every area of importance to the lives of its membership. The second task is the proper province of a religious leader and a large part of his station's duties; the first task, whether to pay income tax, has nothing whatsoever to do with this and yet sets up proscribed speech and actions which effectively obstruct the pastor's ability to speak truth to every situation.³

The proper thing to do is for this Episcopal church to give up its tax-exempt status, return to an authentic model of Christian organization, and stop pretending that it can sleep every night in a secular bed and not wake up violated or free of dissipation.

1. Washington Post, November 19, 2005.
2. "To be tax-exempt as an organization described in IRC Section 501(c)(3) of the Code, an organization must be organized and operated exclusively for one or more of the purposes set forth in IRC Section 501(c)(3) and none of the earnings of the organization may inure to any private shareholder or individual. In addition, it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate at all in campaign activity for or against political candidates." The Internal Revenue Service has several online sources of information on charitable exemptions. See its statement on exemptions for Charities & Non-Profits for the overview. There's also IRS Publication 557, available as a PDF document, and its statement on Political Lobbying Activities, Adapted from IRS Publication 1828, "Tax Guide for Churches and Religious Organizations," February 2004.
3. Dr Regas, All Saints' retired rector, was a critic of the Vietnam war and is now an energetic critic of US intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan; he also founded the Regas Institute specifically to continue working for peace and justice and the progressive policies toward which he helped lead All Saints Church. There is a good short overview of Regas' work as a Christian progressive in the LA Weekly, November 23-29, 2001.

Robbing Hood will make off with your Thanksgiving turkey. Over at United for a Fair Economy (UFE) there is a fresh review of the Bushevik claim that "tax cuts create jobs." Their report found that there has been no correlation between the Bush administration's tax cuts and job creation in the US, although the rate of job growth is now at an all-time low, even after four years of magical tax cuts. What jobs have been created are poor-quality, low-wage, swab-the-deck grinds. Specifically, the report outlines the following:

Reviewed over a six-decade period, changes in tax policy have not resulted definitively in job creation or job destruction; they have no predictable effect on jobs.

From June 2003 to December 2004, the administration promised its tax-cutting policy would create 5.5 million new jobs—but only 2.6 million were created, even though 4.1 million would have been expected without any special economic stimulus.

The weakness in job creation during an economic recovery that we are currently experiencing is unprecedented since World War II.

The number of good-quality jobs (those paying at least $16 an hour, providing employer-paid health insurance and a pension) has remained flat at 25% of all workers.

Black employment is at 89.6%, compared to 95.2% for whites.

Latino workers average more than $10,000 per year less in earnings than whites, and the gap is increasing.

While there is no evidence that massive tax cuts create jobs, there is considerable evidence that they contribute to economy-choking deficits.

"No workers have really benefited from President Bush's tax policies, but blacks and Latinos have suffered disproportionately," said Gloribell Mota, bilingual education specialist at UFE, in the organization's press release. The report is available as a PDF document.

The Saudi government versus Christians. On Tuesday the US Department of State issued its seventh annual report on International Religious Freedom and again included Saudi Arabia in its classification of Countries of Particular Concern (CPC), joining it with Burma, China, Eritrea, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, and Vietnam as nations not merely hostile to religious freedom but among the world's worst violators. While the annual report mimicked the State Department's 2004 assessment, Saudi Arabia has made the list for the past 5 years.¹

The US by law must pressure CPCs to change their policies and practices. Saudi Arabia, however, gets a free ride each year, and on September 30 was given a specific six-month waiver of action. Here's Ambassador John Hanford's response to a press-conference question as to why:

QUESTION: (Inaudible) Magazine. I just wanted to go back to Saudi Arabia and ask, you know, if there are ongoing problems, why was a six-month waiver of action given to the country?

AMBASSADOR HANFORD: Well, the reason for the six-month waiver, first, the International Religious Freedom Act gives us a number of options when a country is designated a CPC, or "Country of Particular Concern." One of the options is a waiver to further the interest of the Act, which basically means if we feel that we can further the cause of religious freedom by granting a waiver, then that can be an acceptable option.

In this case, it is a temporary wavier. And it's because we feel like our discussions are productive, unlike discussions with some other countries. We feel like the Government of Saudi Arabia is moving in the right direction. And as I mentioned earlier, my heart and passion in this is to advance religious freedom as far as we can. And if I feel like some additional time to discuss some important issues may yield some meaningful change, I want to give that a try. And so that's the reason why we chose that option.²

In the meantime, at least for Christians in Saudi Arabia, imprisonment, abuse, and deportation are commonplace. The current issue of World Magazine has a feature on the fate of Samuel Daniel, a Christian and expatriate Indian, who was arrested by Saudi Arabia's religious police, the Muttawa, for holding house-church services and possessing Christian literature:

The 50-year-old's woes began when authorities jailed a visiting Indian pastor. The Muttawa promised his release if he turned over a list of local Christian leaders. One of them was Mr. Daniel.

On May 28, about 20 Muttawa forced their way into Mr. Daniel's home, bringing with them four of his friends, policemen, and representatives from the Ministry of Interior. He was a prize catch, a de facto pastor who had discreetly preached, held theology classes, and conducted regular services for about 250 people in his home.

For the next 13 hours, the entourage isolated Mr. Daniel in his bedroom and confiscated his property. Occasionally, authorities came in to question him, employing a beefy Muttawa member to hit Mr. Daniel and his friends on the face and chest.

The officials then took the men to the Al Mabahes jail at the Ministry of Interior in Riyadh, where they questioned them for 10 days. After shackling their legs and abandoning them in a corridor for three days, the ministry threw them into a jail cell. Here authorities treated them better, providing full meals and beds. But the interrogations were intensive, running every day for four to eight hours.

Officials tried to cajole Mr. Daniel into signing a confession, one that said he broke the law by holding Christian gatherings. He refused. "I understand I'm allowed to exercise my faith at home privately," he told them. He then cited newspaper clippings he had painstakingly stashed at home, which quoted Saudi leaders promising the right. To Mr. Daniel's surprise-and the stunned relief of family and friends-they then released him. He still cannot fathom why.³

The matter didn't end there. After twenty years of employment, his employer, a Saudi law firm, fired him and a mysterious order for his deportation was given. After a stint in a 25-by-25 foot prison cell with 200 inmates, two working toilets, broken window air-conditioning units, and meals of bread labeled "Food for Pigs," he was given 15 days to pack before being sent back to India, leaving behind his wife and four children.

This appears to be a regular occurrence in Saudi Arabia.⁴

1. International Religious Freedom Report for 2005, US Department of State, November 8, 2005. From the Executive Summary: "Saudi Arabia. Freedom of religion does not exist. Islam is the official religion, and all citizens must be Muslims. Religious freedom is not recognized or protected under the country's laws, and basic religious freedoms are denied to all but those who adhere to the state-sanctioned version of Sunni Islam. The Government's official policy is to permit non-Muslims to practice their religions freely at home and in private; however, the Government does not always respect this right in practice. Citizens are denied the freedom to choose or change their religion. Members of the Shi'a minority are subject to officially sanctioned political and economic discrimination, including limited employment opportunities, little representation in official institutions, and restrictions on the practice of their faith and the building of mosques and community centers. The Government enforces a strictly conservative version of Sunni Islam and discriminates against other branches of Islam. The Government prohibits the public practice of other religions; non-Muslim worshippers risk arrest, imprisonment, lashing, deportation, and torture for engaging in religious activity that attracts official attention, especially of the Mutawwa'in (religious police). All public school children receive mandatory religious instruction that conforms to the Salafi tradition. While there was an improvement in press freedom, open discussion of religious issues was limited."
2. On-the-Record Briefing, US Department of State, November 8, 2005.
3. "Wrist Slap," World Magazine, November 19, 2005, Vol 20, No 45.
4. See Voice of the Martyrs on this and other persecuted Christians.