Comments on: The Sign We Were Told to Take Down

By: MoMaMe5

MoMaMe5 — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 03:48:11 +0000

I don’t believe a church should ever be a polling place.
Sign or no sign, I think that some voters would feel uncomfortable casting their vote where their ideals or who they voted for might be questioned and or condemed.
It certianly can happen.
I recall reading about a Catholic parish whose pastor was refusing communion to anyone who voted for Obama.
Honestly it is not the churchs right to ask it’s members whom they voted for.

By: Post-election depression diversions « Esgetology

Post-election depression diversions « Esgetology — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 02:43:42 +0000

[...] LCMS church in Wisconsin ordered to remove pro-life church sign on election day. [...]

By: Susan G

Susan G — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 21:14:22 +0000

Even though I love the sign and agree with it, I think most people in America would see it as an anti-Obama sign. If you’d had “Pray for an End to Abortion” without the “Want Change?” I don’t think the clerk would’ve had a leg to stand on.

By: Carl Vehse

Carl Vehse — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 18:49:49 +0000

I meant “Rev. Peperkorn.”

By: Carl Vehse

Carl Vehse — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 17:36:23 +0000

I asked my “sign guy,” Mr. Bill Dissen to put the above sign up in front of our church. I wanted a sign that clearly was conscious of the upcoming election, but that exhorted parishioners (and others) to do something that was not endorsing a candidate or party. Rev. Cwirla, since the church sign was obviously going to be seen by voters coming to your church to vote, did you consult earlier with your congregation's Board of Trustees, the Board of Elders, the Church Council, or the Voters' Assembly regarding the sign and its statement, which spanned the congregation-approved (?) use of the church facilities for religious and secular purposes? Was there a plan established by you or any of these congregational groups to deal with any potential confrontation by election officials, or political party supporters? Did your congregation consult with its lawyer about its legal rights or restrictions when the building was being used as a polling place? Was the congregation's President, Council, affected boards, or legal counsel consulted before removing your church sign after being told to do so? Was the District President infomed of the incident? And, finally, how is your decision to remove the sign congruent with the following statement from the Missouri Synod's "Render unto Caesar... and unto God" (pp. 86-87): "One of the few social issues concerning which the Synod has been willing to take a (more or less) “activist” role is abortion. While presumably recognizing the risks and dangers of such an approach, the Synod has nevertheless concluded that the question of abortion is addressed so clearly by Scripture, that it is such an extraordinary social problem, and that this problem is so fundamentally tied up with what Scripture says about the God-given duty of the state, that failure to speak and under certain circumstances to act would be tantamount to the failure of the German church under Hitler." [Emphasis added]

By: GEVeith

GEVeith — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 15:22:15 +0000

Thanks for telling me about this, Todd. (Sorry I didn’t return the chat. It was on without my knowing it, and then I had problems with it.) I posted about it on my Cranach blog, which sparked some interesting discussion.

By: Sign of the times — Cranach: The Blog of Veith

Sign of the times — Cranach: The Blog of Veith — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 15:19:40 +0000

[...] God’s reign in the world and to the civil order. Anyway, here is part of what Rev. Peperkorn said about his sign: We are given an opportunity to confess the faith in the midst of an unbelieving world. We can do [...]

By: M. Dent

M. Dent — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 23:41:15 +0000

Josh O. has the right take. This time the situation is over – everything is said and done and I don’t think it should be pursued.

However, I would have a politically and legally minded parishoner find out every possible detail they can about the legal limitations of signs at polling places for next time and determine if your church’s sign meets those requirements. If it doesn’t, perhaps consider moving it (I know, not cheap or easy). Have a lawyer review the material (perhaps the ACLJ would do the review pro-bono if you asked – or perhaps you have a lawyer in your congregation).

Next time, plan a message ahead of time and, if possible, consider having the congregation actually vote on it. Make sure it’s theological and not political (although, as in this case, sometimes theological statements have logical consequences politically). Then, if a situation occurs again in the future, you have the facts on your side as well as the backing of the congregation.

My 2 cents.

By: Phil Jacobs

Phil Jacobs — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 22:22:45 +0000

Sarah,

I also read that same article and could not agree with you more. There really is no option on election day but to comply and take down the sign– But I am in favor of putting it back up and as far as i am concerned the city should find a new polling place for future elections.

By: Sarah Billings

Sarah Billings — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 17:24:00 +0000

I recently read Uwe Siemen-Netto’s article about collective shame regarding the Nazis, the holocaust and the economy in Messiah’s November newsletter. I think it absolutely ties in with this predicament. The church’s purpose in the left hand kingdom, the here and now, is to share the Law and the Gospel, the message of salvation, the scriptures. The kingdoms are separate, but they interact. I think it stinks that the city clerk made the demand to take down the sign. I think you did the right thing in taking it down, relative to the 4th commandment. And I think Messiah should refuse to be a polling place in the future. Just my $0.02 worth.