Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York City has issued a warning to religious organizations that are still meeting, he said: “Enforcement agents will have no choice but to shut down…services.” He added, “Should that not be enough (to stop people from meeting, authorities may) need to take additional action up to the point of fines and potentially closing the building permanently.”
What does the church do with that? Does it heed the warning to avoid being permanently shut down? Double-down and get more people to show up? Or find creative ways to keep services going and comply with the law? I'm trying to work out a reasonable answer in my own mind because I don't think the answer is as black and white as some may assume.
Now to some people of faith, the previous statement may come across as faithless, maybe even heretical. These same people will say: "The answer is obvious!" And part of me understands that, because part of me feels that way. Ask anyone that knows me well, and they will tell you I'm not one to back away from a fight. But I learned long ago that an initial response or reaction while being on the right track may not always be the whole answer. And sometimes, the original reaction or response is wrong altogether. I’ve learned to not respond initially if I have not thought it through.
That does not mean I have never thought about the government shutting down churches. Clearly, that is wrong from both a moral and constitutional perspective. Religion has been a sacred part of humanity since its inception and that is true whether you are a creationist, evolutionist or believe in intelligent design. We, as humans, cannot escape the grasp of religious experience or the good that it has brought upon humanity. To think a government can extinguish what I believe to be a fundamental essence of our being is reprehensible.
But one must admit, the de Blasio situation is not what I described above. Some will argue that behind de Blasio’s words, is a sinister intention. And that may well be true but I cannot judge someone I do not personally know. I certainly could take that position since I do happen to believe that fundamentally, our human nature is at its core wicked. I believe in the regeneration of a wicked heart, which comes exclusively through acceptance of Christ's sacrifice. (How acceptance is defined varies from person to person, but it at least means living Christ-like, any short insight into Christ's life however, can leave a human feeling hopeless.) But even then, this situation is still not that.
This situation is different because of COVID-19. The fact is that a Pandemic is sweeping across the globe and has killed thousands of people. I posted an article about the reaction that people are having to COVID-19 and I think some of what I said in that article is applicable here. If a government who fears the spread of a virus decides to shut everything down, which is almost the case with COVID-19, we have to ask: "Is this response out of mercy and love for our fellow citizens or is it men and women taking advantage of the situation to push an agenda they had all along?"
Hopefully you are seeing the difficulty in figuring this problem out. We know from the 2 trillion-dollar Bill that was passed that as long as at least two opinions persist, each side will use the situation at hand to get what they want. The problem is that we cannot assume that is always the driving force. But we must understand that proclivity exists in a lot of people.
Obviously, lines are being drawn. My feeling is that if churches in New York City have not stopped meeting they probably don’t want to start now. Especially if you have a proclivity towards fight vs flight. It’s normal to double down on your long-held beliefs. But the same question must be asked here as well. Is the religious person being merciful and loving or pushing an agenda?
The consensus among experts seems to be that social-distancing is an effective way to stop the spread of the coronavirus. It seems logical. We’ve all heard more than once a boss tell an employee: “If you are sick, stay home, don’t get the rest of us sick.” So, we know that social distancing is a natural and acceptable response to make sure no one else gets sick. Now while that is true, it's almost always practiced when we know someone is sick. The sick person stays away, and we stay away from the sick person. Everyone understands that. However, if no one around us is sick, let’s say for example, in a church, it no longer seems natural to practice social distancing.
That’s why it might seem weird to you to stand six feet apart or be forced to stay home on a Friday night that you would otherwise spend sitting down eating a good meal at a nice restaurant. It’s easy to understand why a church, which by nature builds familial communities would be thrown for a loop when you can no longer act normal with those you spend a significant amount of time with.
Now it’s clear that churches across America are practicing social distancing. And, as far as I have read and heard, they are doing so out of love and mercy and also obedience to local guidelines or possible mandates. It seems to me that churches that have done this are practicing wisdom and in following social distancing guidelines taking care of one another. It may seem like tough love, but its love nonetheless.
Now can we say the same for those churches that keep meeting? And meeting more so in areas that the risk is much higher like New York City. My gut feeling tells me that what drives the meetings is more resistance than care. But is there still love in that? One answer to that is, yes, there can be. I think it comes down to the traits that people seem to have inherently. If you are agreeable for example, it would not be hard for you to say: "Yes let’s practice social distancing, it seems reasonable and I want to make sure I am safe and my family is safe."
A much less agreeable person might say: "No way that the government is shutting my freedom down, I have a constitutional right to my religious belief and that includes gathering." This final point is true. We live in a country that drafted a constitution that says:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
I tend to believe that the signers of the U.S Constitution were probably not that agreeable, or at least understood the benefits of being disagreeable when it came to religious freedom. The language is clear. Why does Mayor de Blasio take it upon himself to target church gatherings and threaten to shut down buildings permanently? You can chalk it up to an abundance of caution, or blatant dismissal of a citizen’s rights. Either way, this will not be solved easily. But the church must be aware that somewhere in this country, people of faith are facing the possibility of having their rights violated. We cannot ignore this.
What is my ultimate answer? I think de Blasio should reconsider his position. Freedom of religion is precious in this country. To threaten to shut down places of worship is out of bounds. Hundreds if not thousands of churches have been creative in their response to COVID-19. Why not connect these organizations to those that are still meeting and see what creative ideas emerge? How about lending empty government buildings to communities of faith, where they can meet in smaller groups? Why not think more before we even consider shutting places of worship down? It's draconian.
What should people that frequent places of worship do? Consider all your options. Look at the facts of COVID-19 and determine what is a risk and what is acceptable. If a worship service leads to others getting sick and possibly even dying, are we saying that is the right thing to do? Let me give you a more ancient example. Would you gather with lepers in your church? Be honest? COVID-19 is invisible to us as far as we can tell. Perhaps that has led to a false sense of safety. But if a leper showed up, would you hug and greet them and sit them in the front row?
Let’s not make this about the extremes. When we do that, everybody loses something. We can see love and mercy and care in social distancing. Even if we hate the term and how it makes us feel. But where social distancing does not happen, an overreaction is dangerous. We need to be wise. A strongman will always get his way in this world. Places of worship can be shut down because people of faith did not decide to fight another day. It's a tough decision to make.
As people of faith, we must stay vigilant that a social distancing order designed to keep people safe does not get turned into a suppression of rights. Where that is the case, people of faith must stand their ground. Here is the kicker, especially if you are a Christian, we may suffer loss in this life, but we know the life to come matters more. (And you can be sure another life comes after this one, the struggle to make sure we live the good life after this life is what gives this life meaning.)
If you decide to die on this hill, that is, to keep meeting until you are forced to stop, don’t lose your faith if you are stripped of what has become familiar to you. Know that this world’s suffering is temporary. Jesus said that he was “sending (us) out like sheep among wolves." That we had to “be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.” Meaning that we stay alert and on guard, but that in all we do, before God’s and men's eyes we remain blameless. Jesus warns us to “be on (our) guard;” because we “will be handed over to the local councils and be flogged in the synagogues.” He warns, we “will be hated by everyone because of (Him), but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved." Then he gives this interesting piece of advice: “When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another.” (Quotes taken from NIV Matthew 10:16-23)
We cannot expect de Blasio to act as a man of faith. I feel confident saying that. A man of faith would not consider permanently shutting places of worship down. That leaves people of faith to act properly. Lean on your faith, not as a crutch, but as a firm place to affix yourself to. Knowing that you can endure.
Comments