In the midst of this panic, I find myself pausing for reflection. One of my shortcomings, I suppose. Like when you're watching a stupid horror movie and you're yelling at the on-screen character, "Don't just stand there! Run!!" But, I just stand there.
I've already talked about some of this. I think we have a problem with "essential." The government has decided to suspend the First Amendment because church is not "essential." If you believe that's true, you may not know church. And if the government can determine that your religious beliefs are a threat to public health, so you can't have your religious beliefs, we are looking at a very bad outcome. I've also talked about the fact that we have hope in a coronavirus world. But there is more.
I think there is so much strange here. It's strange that the "essential" jobs largely turn out not to be those jobs that people have gone into great debt to get degrees for. College professors and political scientists and software developers and rocket scientists are all pretty high up there, but not so essential when an invisible virus starts playing tag with everyone. (I won't even comment on the Women's Studies, Philosophy, or Underwater Basket-weaving kind of degrees out there.) No, what we need are the garbage truck drivers, the grocery store workers, the UPS drivers, gas station attendants, that kind of thing. Funny how our priorities shift in crisis, isn't it?
I'm thinking about the disparity between the doom and gloom declarations that give us a worldwide run on toilet paper juxtaposed with the statistical facts. On one hand, the White House is projecting 100K to 240K deaths from this thing. On the other hand, the death rate in the U.S. is around 2%. That means that there will be a 600% increase in the exposure cases or a massive increase in death rate ... while we're already in lockdown and hard at work on this ... in one of the most technologically advanced nations on the planet. The numbers aren't adding up, but we're still in a serious panic.
I'm thinking about the problem of "social distancing" -- of the idea that "isolation" = healthy. Really? Maybe we're looking at minimizing a virus. What other effects are we looking at? Loneliness, isolation, panic, fear, dismantled churches, dismantled businesses, dismantled lives, economic crisis -- fill in your own blank. We might slow this virus some, and I'm not saying we shouldn't, but I think there are far more "unintended consequences" that we aren't considering, and they often do not equate to "healthy" and certainly not "no harm."
But the big question is "Why?" More to the point, "Where is God in all of this?" Renowned Professor of New Testament, N.T. Wright, wrote a piece for Time telling us that Christianity doesn't have the answers. (The title was worse than the article.) That's simply not true. Scripture does have the answers; we just don't like them. Scripture tells us that God made everything good (Gen 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25) -- very good (Gen 1:31). He didn't mess it up. We did (Gen 3:13-19; Rom 8:18-22). So, without claiming this virus is a judgment from God, we can clearly grasp that it is a product of human sin. But we also know that nothing happens here without God's okay. Everything that happens is, ultimately God's will (Psa 115:3; Matt 10:29; Eph 1:11). Including disasters (Amos 3:6; Isa 45:7). See? I told you we don't like the answers.
The truth is all creation points to God (Psa 19:1; Rom 1:20). Including the bad stuff. Including mass-murdering viruses. Some of creation points to His goodness. Some points to God's holiness via our contrasting evil. Everything points to God. We may be vague on how that works -- we end up staring at the finger doing the pointing rather than what it's pointing at -- but what we do know is that God is good (James 1:17; Luke 18:19; Psa 34:8; Psa 107:1; 1 John 1:5; etc.). We do know that God is Sovereign (Psa 135:6; Job 42:2; Eph 3:20; Job 9:12; 1 Tim 1:17, Rev 19:6; 1 Tim 6:15; etc.)
One other consideration. I'm not saying that this is a judgment of God. He hasn't said so; I won't make the claim. But we do know that, if it was, it would be just and correct and even merciful, given the just response from God that we have earned (Rom 6:23).
We know that human sin -- of which all of us are fully culpable -- brought about this virus. We know that God allowed it out of His Sovereignty for good. And we also know that there is salvation available (Acts 16:30-31). We look at this pandemic and think, "How bad can it get?" Jesus answers, "Unless you repent you will all likewise perish." (Luke 13:1-5) May God grant that many heed the call.
13 comments:
I believe that the Church is essential. but the church building is not..
I believe that the church gathering together is essential. but gathering at the risk of infecting others is not.
we may exercise our right to assemble in defiance to the government's dictates.
but is it the responsible thing to do at a time like this? Are we considering the collateral damage; when we willfully expose ourselves to potential infection, at the risk of bringing it home to infect others. when i come to a four way stop, and i have the right of way, should i crash into the guy that went out of turn, because i had a right to go first?
Christians talk so much about being an example to the world. so what kind of example are we really being? do we believe that God will make an exception on our behalf and insure that no one will get sick if infected at church?
I'm not disagreeing, Bob, but isn't it true that we are called to do things that might certainly result in sickness and/or death? I only ask because you talked about the suggestion that some might meet thinking that they get protection from it. I can't imagine why they would (biblically). Still, some might think, "We believers will meet anyway even if we get sick." Like those boys in the fiery furnace.
I'm not disagreeing with the premise. I can't imagine why that pastor in Louisiana thinks his divine mandate is "gather the largest group you can find" rather than "gather as you can."
What's interesting in this aspect of the conversation is that it ignores the Church's history of going into dangerous places to help people. I believe that the disconnect is in confusing what happens when we gather in a sanctuary with actually being the Church. I agree that wisdom says that if we can do corporate worship, temporarily, via technology that we should. However, I'd also suggest that we should be willing to risk sickness to care for those individuals who need our help. Yet, even that care can be accomplished while taking reasonable precautions.
I'm torn on Churches or pastors being punished for gathering. I've always tended toward the philosophy that you allow people to do stupid things and let the consequences of their stupidity fall on them. Where this can be a problem, is that the consequences might not fall on the stupid people, as much as they fall on others.
At the risk of sounding like Dan, I do think that we as Christians shouldn't engage in behavior that can harm others. Not out of compulsion, but simply because we should love and value others.
As far as the essential thing, I've noticed that many are using the "essentialness" of certain jobs as an excuse to push for a higher minimum wage. Yet, these jobs still don't require any more skill than they ever have, they don't add any more value to their employer than they ever did, and even if they did $15/hr isn't really a living wage anyway. Would it be a good thing if employers give those folks some sort of hazard pay, and that we as consumers express our appreciation, absolutely. But that doesn't mitigate that fact that there are millions of people with the skills to do those jobs.
There is a lot more to unpack, but this is enough for now.
I wonder when the caution of not wanting to get sick becomes ridiculous. There are thousands of communicable illnesses we interact with when we come together. How many 10s of thousands die from just the flu each year? That is a highly communicable virus. But we don't suggest we stop interacting because of it. When you say we should avoid church gathering for the health and safety of others for this, when does it stop at that? When do we cede our mandate to gather to the fear of getting sick? For now, the law says we can't gather in large groups, which would still allow small groups of believers to fellowship. But our fear of this illness has removed even those gatherings, broadly.
I was taught when I was young (yes, a LONG time ago) that when a believer is told by a God-ordained authority to do something contrary to God's commands, the best approach would be to find a creative alternative. Find out what is really behind what you're being told and figure out a way to satisfy the intent without compromising God's commands.
I agree that we ought not surrender God's commands to simply satisfy a governmental decree if that decree is opposed to God's commands. But thus far I've been able to meet with other believers both in person and in personal digital format (audio and visual) to be classified as "assembling." I don't like it. I don't think it can last. It can't replace actual physical presence. But I don't think it constitutes a violation of God's command, so, at least for the moment, I'm okay with it as it is. For the moment.
David,
I guess I'm not looking at it so much from my fear of getting sick as I am from the perspective of my getting someone else sick. I'm also suggesting that the decision should be that of each individual church, although that may result in consequences of a church decides to meet. (I have no problem with choosing an action that can have negative consequences, as long as those who choose it are willing to accept the consequences) I think that the 1st century church, which was known for risking themselves to help the sick should be our example. However, that shouldn't mean that we don't take precautions when we do. I'm not sure that temporarily deciding to gather virtually to lower risk is "ceding our mandate". I agree that small groups can decide to gather if they choose, but I don't see any situation where I would mandate that someone gather physically, if they aren't comfortable either. Especially of there is a virtual option. From what I've seen, I don't see churches not gathering because of fear, although I'm sure some are.
Stan,
I completely agree with your last comment. While I would prefer to gather in person, I wouldn't say that I am being denied the ability to gather virtually or in small groups physically.
Here's where it gets personal. My wife and I are in a Bible study group that meets weekly. We've chosen to gather via Zoom for the time being. Depending on who's in attendance we can have over 20 so we're definitely pushing group size. I would love to invite one or two couples to gather physically and combine with the larger group virtually. I think it would be a good compromise. My wife, disagrees and doesn't want to take the risk. Further, it's possible that the others I'd ask also don't want to take the risk. I've decided that it's better not to force the issue and be appreciative that we can gather at all.
Obviously, this is all contingent on this being a temporary situation.
Craig, we kind of went the other way. As the orders came down, we diminished who came over, but eventually everyone was too scared to show up, so now we're exclusively meeting digitally. Church prayer meeting, two Bible studies, that kind of thing. Being able to see and hear everyone is better than ... not. This whole "virtual church" thing -- singing some songs and watching a sermon with just my wife and I -- won't hack it for long, but ...
You both denied and admitted that people aren't gathering out of fear. It could be fear of infecting others. But it's still fear. Healthy precaution is one thing. But at what point does healthy precaution become paranoia? People are avoiding even small groups for fear of an illness that for most people is no worse than the flu. At what point do we finally admit that life is inherently dangerous?
As for mandating gathering, I was speaking of the biblical mandate, not a personal one. You can't virtually hug a hurting believer. Or lay your hands on them for that touch of reassurance and empathy during a prayer. Without proximity, lifting each other up is very limited. There is no end in sight to this outbreak, and no guarantee that it won't come back around next year, since there's no cure for viruses. All I see around me are people afraid of something they simply have no control over. Take precautions, certainly, but don't let those precautions rule our lives like we are allowing.
I got home today and my wife admitted that she’s scared, it’s hard because I don’t think fear is totally appropriate, but I don’t want to not take her seriously.
I agree that I’m not sure how long it’ll be tolerable, but I do get to hear multiple sermons on a regular basis.
I don’t want to go off a cliff, but virtual church is a lot better that what persecuted Christians have.
"Don't concentrate on the finger or you will miss all that heavenly glory." -Bruce Lee, Enter the Dragon. This immediately jumped to mind when I read your similar statement. Coincidence?
Regarding unintended consequences, I just read how spousal abuse reports have surged since the stay at home orders began. Who would have guessed forcing people to stay inside would result in the abusers abusing?
My wife has been "attending" church on-line. I'd have to watch re-runs due to my work schedule. Not the same.
There's a 30 minute video going around that attributes all this illness to 5G implementation. It's by some pastor who may be South African, given he speaks of having instituted some ideas in Africa. Anyway, he refers to the impact of various forms of radiations having been the reason for the illness, and goes back to the 1918 pandemic for evidence of his theory (which he puts forth as more than a theory). In doing so, he eventually speaks of corporate worship as having its own form of energy that has a real effect on the world...or at least the areas in which such worship takes place. He thinks the restrictions on such gatherings may be intentional for that reason. Interesting and wacky at the same time, but he claims much of what he says can be backed up by science. I haven't taken the time to investigate as I don't expect this to go on much longer.
Yes, Marshal, coincidence. The version I heard was not from a Bruce Lee movie, but, from what I read, we (Bruce Lee's writers and me) both got it from a similar source.
I'd be interested in the science that measures the energy of worship in the real world.
Marshal,
I saw that video you are referring to. Scientifically it was interesting to say the least. My bible believing sister sent me the link as soon as it was posted that morning, you tube had already pulled it. Found a "mirrored" copy and was able to watch it, that afternoon pulled again. Now that was what I found fascinating. So many conspiracy theories going around on You tube but that one they pulled, things that make you go hmmmmmmmmm….
Post a Comment