N※N

Christian-Nationalist Churches Channel Tithes into Political PACs, Funding 2024 Elections

  //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. -into-political-pacs-funding-2024-elections.html
  Published in Politics and Government on Monday, November 24th 2025 at 12:54 GMT by Rolling Stone

• 🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication
• 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source

2025-11-02 219 x 224 / 6243 Bytes

2025-11-24 245 x 206 / 3872 Bytes

2025-11-24 194 x 224 / 10948 Bytes

2025-11-24 232 x 217 / 4383 Bytes

Christian‑Nationalist Churches Pour Money into Political Campaigns – A Rolling Stone Deep Dive

In a new piece for Rolling Stone, writer Daniel L. “Danny” Bragg (July 2024) uncovers a growing, and increasingly controversial, trend: churches that espouse a “Christian‑nationalist” worldview are shifting from traditional spiritual ministries to overtly political advocacy, and they’re using tax‑exempt money to buy influence in the 2024 election. Bragg’s article is part of the magazine’s broader “Faith & Politics” series, which probes how religious institutions shape the nation’s policy agenda. It pulls together data from the Federal Election Commission, testimonies from church leaders and political operatives, and legal analysis on the limits of church political spending.

From Pulpit to PAC

At the heart of Bragg’s narrative is a handful of churches—most of them evangelical in tone—that have converted their congregational funds into political action. The piece begins by spotlighting the “Christians for Liberty” initiative at the First Baptist Church of Dayton, Ohio, which donated $300,000 last year to a network of Republican super‑PACs. A similar case is the “Pioneers of the Faith” group at the Trinity Lutheran Church in St. Paul, Minnesota, which funneled $215,000 to a Democratic candidate who “supports faith‑in‑government” in the state.

Bragg describes how these churches view their mission through the lens of “Christian nationalism” – the idea that America’s political institutions should be explicitly Christian. By funding candidates who align with that vision, they believe they are protecting “the nation’s covenant” against secularism and what they call the “cultural Marxist” threat. “When a church sees itself as a guardian of the national identity, money becomes a tool for defense,” Bragg notes.

The Legal Tight‑rope

The article explains the tricky legal landscape. Under IRS rules, 501(c)(3) organizations—most churches—are prohibited from engaging in partisan political activity. However, the article points out that many churches have created separate 501(c)(4) “social advocacy” arms that can legally spend money on politics. The trick, Bragg argues, is that the same money often flows from the church’s tithes into these 501(c)(4) entities, effectively using tax‑exempt donations for partisan ends.

Bragg cites a 2023 IRS memo that clarified the boundary: if a church’s “political activity is not ‘substantial’” relative to its overall mission, it may still be allowed. But the line is blurry. “We’re seeing churches that say ‘We’re a church, not a campaign’ while literally handing out campaign materials at the pulpit,” Bragg writes.

Voices from the Front Lines

To humanize the data, Bragg interviews two prominent pastors. Rev. Michael J. “Mick” Carver of the Christian Faith Fellowship in Dallas, Texas, says he began allocating a portion of his congregation’s budget to a “faith‑based civic engagement” group. “We’re not endorsing a candidate in the church itself; we’re just supporting the values we believe are essential to America,” he claims, echoing a common defense used by many evangelical leaders.

Opposing Carver’s view, Rev. Lillian P. “Lily” Thompson of the First Church of God in Chicago argues that such spending violates the church’s moral duty. “We’re selling our soul to politics,” she says. “Our primary duty is to the Lord, not to any particular candidate.”

Bragg also brings in political analysts. Dr. Sara L. Hayes, a professor of Religious Studies at Columbia University, warns that “the fusion of church and state is a dangerous path that could erode the principle of separation of powers.” Meanwhile, political strategist Kevin R. Morales argues that these churches are simply filling a void left by the Republican Party’s waning engagement with faith‑based communities.

Concrete Numbers

The article provides a clear table of the top ten churches with the largest political contributions in 2023. The top entries include:

While the total sum may seem modest compared to the national campaign budget, Bragg notes that for a single local church, it represents a sizeable portion of the overall budget and often covers an entire month’s worth of salaries for a small ministry team.

The Wider Context

Bragg links to a prior Rolling Stone feature on the “Christian Nationalist” movement in the U.S., which contextualizes how religious rhetoric is being used to push for policies like “religious liberty” bills that critics argue may discriminate against LGBTQ+ and immigrant communities. He also cites a 2021 study by the Pew Research Center, showing a 5‑percentage‑point increase in Americans who “identify their faith with the nation’s identity” since 2014.

In his closing paragraphs, Bragg urges readers to consider how such church‑run political spending may influence the 2024 election cycle. He notes that in early primary races, the influx of church funds is already swaying outcomes in several swing states. “If churches continue to spend without adequate oversight, we risk a future where the church’s role in government is indistinguishable from the political party it endorses.”

Key Takeaways

1. Christian‑nationalist churches are turning to partisan political spending – funneling congregational money into PACs and super‑PACs.
2. Legal loopholes are being exploited – churches create 501(c)(4) affiliates to skirt 501(c)(3) restrictions.
3. Church leaders have divided views – some defend the practice as civic engagement; others condemn it as political corruption.
4. The money, while small compared to national totals, is significant for local churches – often funding entire ministries.
5. The trend reflects a broader movement of religious rhetoric influencing U.S. policy – with potential ramifications for church‑state separation.

Bragg’s article serves as a warning and a call to action for anyone interested in the future of faith, politics, and the rule of law in America. It underscores the urgency of scrutinizing how tax‑exempt church funds are being redirected toward partisan ends and the importance of maintaining clear boundaries between spiritual institutions and the political arena.