Yes, I know, that's not how you spell "masquerade." That's because I wasn't trying to spell masquerade. I want to talk about the travesty of masks.
I know people, Christians even, that consider masks evil. Masks are wrong. They're outlandish. I've heard more than once that they "cover the image of God." And I can't believe this is an issue. So, let's take a look at it. Is there anything biblical that addresses the wearing of masks?
Six times in Matthew 24 Jesus says, "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!" (Matt 24:13, 15, 23, 25, 27, 29) The Greek word used there is ὑποκριτής --hupokritēs. It is a reference to one who plays a part. In the Greek theater of the day, hupokritēs referred to the actors who would wear masks to play the parts. One actor could wear multiple masks to play multiple parts. It refers to a actual two-faced person. So wearing masks is bad. And, of course, that's not the same thing as wearing masks in a pandemic. So?
What Scriptures cover it? Searching ... searching ... none. "Well," they tell me, "the mask covers the face, the principal place where we reflect the image of God." Okay, that would be an assertion that would be Scripture-related ... except that is not in Scripture. We are made in the image of God; that's absolutely clear. But the connection to the face doesn't seem to make the cut. And we are forbidden to walk around nude, so covering up the image of God isn't, apparently, a problem in the Bible. Others make it about the "veil" and refer to Christ's death on the cross as "tearing the veil from top to bottom." While He certainly did that, is that somehow a mandate not to wear masks for medical purposes? In some cultures, wearing masks is normal and practically an everyday occurrence. Where there is high pollution or other undesirable conditions, they just wear masks as a matter of practice. Would we argue that they're sinning in doing it?
Another common argument is not religious, but constitutional. Does the government have the constitutional right to mandate masks? I will state here and now that I won't answer the question. Not because I don't have an opinion and not because I don't have an answer, but because "constitutional" does not rise to the level of "biblical." As such, if it is or isn't constitutional would be my opinion and not binding. If it's in Scripture, that's binding.
So what do Scriptures cover? Paul argues in his first letter to the church at Corinth, "All things are lawful, but not all things are helpful. All things are lawful, but not all things build up." (1 Cor 10:23) He points here to the principle of Christian liberty -- that which is not specifically commanded or forbidden is a matter of individual conscience. That being said, Paul goes on to argue, "Let no one seek his own good, but the good of his neighbor." (1 Cor 10:24) "Give no offense to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God, just as I try to please everyone in everything I do, not seeking my own advantage, but that of many, that they may be saved." (1 Cor 10:32-33) The concept of Christian liberty in one direction says, "I get to decide," and, in the other, says, "Don't decide to do what causes others to stumble." So he tells us, "If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all." (Rom 12:18)
It is not the call of Scripture that Christians in America stand up and defend our 1st Amendment rights. It might be the call to citizens and it might be the call to Americans, but it's not the call of Scripture. Nor is it a biblical requirement that we keep our faces (or any other body part) uncovered. (It might be argued that women should wear hats and men should not (1 Cor 11:4-5), but I think even that is stretching a point.) I cannot find a biblical mandate to refuse to wear a mask in a pandemic. Mind you, I hate masks. They are uncomfortable. They are a serious hardship. I'm experiencing headaches and blurred vision, bad skin and rashes. On top of the physical, they are a detriment to communication and human interaction. I despise masks. Even so, because I think that Scripture commands that I do not use my freedom as a cause for stumbling or place my preferences over the good of my neighbor -- those around me -- I will submit to the indignity and discomfort and not wrangle a biblical argument against masks where there is none. But, hey, that's just me, right?
23 comments:
"Even so, because I think that Scripture commands that I do not use my freedom as a cause for stumbling or place my preferences over the good of my neighbor -- those around me -- I will submit to the indignity and discomfort and not wrangle a biblical argument against masks where there is none. But, hey, that's just me, right?"
Yes. That's just you.
Masks are not risk free, as you know. So then you also must know that masks are not "for the good of your neighbor" if they cause harm. I personally consider NOT wearing a mask to be "for the good of my neighbor", sparing them the discomfort and potential rashes and infections they can and do cause. And also for clear communication. Imagine the damage being done to children who have to wear one all day at school. We communicate, in part, via facial expressions. They spend lot of the day not seeing that.
"But what about surgery. They wear them there, so they must do someting".
Not really. There are studies that show a doubling of wound infections when wearing a mask in surgery as aoosed to not wearing one.
I will continue to not wear a mask. For the good of my neighbor. Wearing a mask and catering to the lowest common denominator of others fear doesn't make you a loving Christian. Validating unreasonable fear isn't loving.
Source: I am a RN who isn't buying the mask narrative. And there are a LOT of us.
Obviously you're free to do what you think best. I was trying to point out that 1) wearing a mask is not a biblical, moral issue, and 2) there are possible reasons that it might be considerate to do so. "I couldn't care less about your petty fears" is your call. I don't find the fact that some people are terrified something I should assault with vigor. So, yeah, it's just me.
Anon, you don't wear a mask to protect others from getting rashes and irritated skin? I think you might be wearing them wrong if you wearing a mask is irritating other people's skin.
So, am I to take it that pointing out irrational fear is at once "assaulting with vigor"? Yeah. That IS you if that's the case. If masking causes problems...arguably more than they solve, if they solve any at all...why isn't it Christian to resist governmental policies that cause us harm? Is there no limit, or are you suggesting we submit to all manner of suffering which can be averted, diverted and subverted because...you know...God? How exactly is making our way in the world necessarily distinct from putting our trust in Him? I would say they go hand in hand.
Yes, Art, you and our friendly neighborhood anonymous RN are expressing the brave American liberty we've come to admire. I am expressing a lower version -- a mere biblical one. Paul boldly declared the truth. "Is food offered to idols profane? No! Idols have no real existence and there is only one God, so I'm free to eat meat offered to idols." (1 Cor 8:1-6) Paul goes on to say, "But take care that this right of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak." (1 Cor 8:9) Applying Paul's thinking to wearing masks, "If my going without a mask causes my brother to stumble, I will never go without a mask lest I make my brother stumble." (1 Cor 8:13) So I refuse to terrify a grandmother who is inordinately afraid of viruses and maskless terrors and you're bravely going to flaunt your freedom in the name of truth and liberty. The American way, sure, but not the one I see in Scripture. You do it your way; I'll do it mine.
Is that Biblical snark? Perhaps you could answer the reasonable question your position provokes? Is there no limit? Is it just grandmothers inordinately afraid of viruses and maskless terrors, or are you suggesting we alter our personal lives for the benefit of absolutely any inordinate and/or irrational fear, regardless of how inundated we might be with such people? I'm all for being considerate of those with such fears, but your admonishing seems a bit irrational given the mask/no mask argument has no moral component such that not wearing one will lead anyone to act in a manner they consider sinful...which is the warning in Paul's letter. In other words, in what way does your terrified grandmother stumble because I'm not wearing a mask? It's absurd.
How far away must one be to mitigate this grandmother's terror? If she sees me at the end of the block, am I in breech of your weird Paul application?
Just by way of illustration, the wife and I were spending a week in Door County, Wis...a favorite getaway for the last 35 years or more. As we walked and came upon an old couple or group of old couples (they sometimes run in packs), we would step off into the street and walk around them, regardless of whether or not they were masked, which at least half were not. Several of them understood what we were doing and nodded their appreciation or said "Thank you". (Now, we're in our 60's ourselves, but when younger masked people walked around us, they seemed more like they were avoiding our unmasked presence, as they also seemed to avoid eye contact. Weird.)
I also keep a mask or bandana (far more stylish) with me for those situations when I'm unable to do business without one, or where a merchant might run afoul of other patrons because he didn't kick me out for not wearing one.
So at what point will you stop wearing one yourself, given that the reason grandmothers are so terrified is because they've been lied to by their government? When they deign to give us the all clear, do you really think that will allay the fears of all who've been terrorized?
Is there no limit?
No, it wasn't snark. Lots of people, including Christians, consider me irrational for basing my moral beliefs on the Bible and I get it.
No limits? Not for me as far as I can tell. That's because I'm an "It's not about me" extremist. That's because my loss of personal freedoms aren't as outrageous to me as they are to most others. In short, that's because I'm strange. So, unless my actions are required or forbidden by Scripture, I'm willing to consider not doing or doing things I'm free to do or not do if it produces peace in others. But as I've tried to make clear in the post and in the comments, you do it your way; I'll do it mine. I'm not trying to be snarky or judgmental. The only point of this blog entry was "Perhaps there is another way to think about these things" and our RN and you say, "No, not this time." Fine.
The "snark" was in your first sentence, which together with the second is too condescending in tone to produce much peace. Whether intended or not, you imply the RN and I are beyond reason in our position...a position that, at least in my case, rejects the extremism of the "just wear the damn mask" people. There's no Biblical encouragement to accept unreasonable directives without reasoned objection. My anecdotal examples should've illustrated, to a good extent, the limits of my own position. We don't serve our fellow man by enabling their irrational fears...especially those provoked by falsehood. And I don't reject the mask to posture as a freedom fighter...though there's indeed an element of that regardless. I do it because it's a pointless exercise and thus a lie for me to participate as if it isn't. This is absolutely not a "stumbling block" situation of the typed discussed by Paul.
I understand your position. Paul thought that the irrational fears of some Christians that meat sacrificed to idols was foolish. He really hit that concept hard. But he ended with "If it causes someone to stumble, I will never eat meat again." No biblical encouragement to accept unreasonable directives? You don't see it. Seems to me that Paul did.
By not wearing a mask, you tell other people that believe they work that you don't care about them. You care more about your own comfort (and for some people their appearance) than you do their safety. If you think being uncaring is a good Christian position to take, we might be reading different Bibles.
"No biblical encouragement to accept unreasonable directives? You don't see it. Seems to me that Paul did."
Paul was dealing with "new" Christians. That is, those who were still abiding Jewish law regarding food sacrificed to idols. These people did not wish to offend God by doing what they thought was wrong. To see a Christian, who was brought up as they were, partaking would bring about confusion. They continued to see eating food sacrificed to pagan gods as sinful. His point was that what one believes is sinful is sinful to them and it is that to which he encouraged consideration...not the foolishness of the belief.
There's no sin component to this issue given the debate concerns the efficacy of wearing masks. More exists to demonstrate there is none, but refusing to wear one doesn't equate to demanding no one does. If one believes a mask is necessary, wearing one themselves is protection enough for them. But hey, if you think I'm being mean to terrified grandmothers, it would go a long way toward recognizing their fear if their faces weren't covered.
"By not wearing a mask, you tell other people that believe they work that you don't care about them."
Nonsense. That's just abject drivel. If you guys think you're sinning by not altering your lives to accommodate the irrational fears of others, then I would suggest you alter your lives for every irrational fear expressed at all times and alleviate your guilt.
"You care more about your own comfort (and for some people their appearance) than you do their safety."
That's a very unChristian attitude to assume you know the hearts of your fellow man. What's more, their safety isn't at risk because I don't wear a mask. Their safety is at risk far more by their own habits and choices than by what I do or don't do, given nothing I do is dangerous to anyone around me. I know how to keep my distance when I'm sick or feeling sick. I don't sneeze or cough on people, or drink from their glass.
"If you think being uncaring is a good Christian position to take, we might be reading different Bibles."
If you think not wearing a mask demonstrates I'm uncaring...given the worthlessness of masks...then I question your ability to read Scripture properly and frankly, it compels in me an unChristian desire to suggest what you can do with your sanctimony.
Here's what "caring" looks like:
"Here, timid grandmother. Read all this data regarding the ineffectiveness of masks. But know that if you feel more comfortable and safer wearing one, you're absolutely free to do so. In the meantime, do all you can to strengthen your immune system, because that's absolutely beneficial for the prevention of diseases of all kinds, and there's absolutely no debate about that."
Your premise: "No biblical encouragement to accept unreasonable directives." The text disagrees. Avoiding eating meat sacrificed to idols is unreasonable, but Paul won't override their unreasonableness and eat meat in front of them. Was it a different audience? Sure, but the principle remains the same. You also suggest there is no sin component. Maybe, although I know Christians who have taken your "There's no problem with ignoring mask mandates" to "It's a sin to wear a mask" to "We will ignore the law because God commands it." Not biblical at all, and moving right into its own sin component. Besides, the definition of sin in this case is "whatever does not proceed from faith is sin" (Rom 14:23), so if they don't share your conviction and you push them to violate their convictions, there certainly is a sin component.
As I said, you're pursuing the standard American liberty and the vast majority -- Christian or not -- would commend you and condemn me, so I'm not telling you to back off. I am just disagreeing with you.
Call me crazy, but I’m willing to wear a mask when it makes others around me more comfortable. When I’m working with clients, I’ll virtually always defer to their preferences on many things. I guess respecting others is somehow inappropriate nowadays.
"I guess respecting others is somehow inappropriate nowadays."
I'm not clear, from what people are telling me. Is it inappropriate for everyone or just for Christians? I can't really tell.
"Your premise: "No biblical encouragement to accept unreasonable directives." The text disagrees."
No. It doesn't. At least not the passage you've offered in support.
"Avoiding eating meat sacrificed to idols is unreasonable, but Paul won't override their unreasonableness and eat meat in front of them."
But why? Not because it was foolish not to. He denied himself because of the weakness of those who believed it was sinful, that should they partake despite the belief it was sinful, they might also indulge in other sinful practices. Again, no moral component to wearing or not wearing. And also...again...what limit to this concept is there? Will you give up everything if surrounded by people with irrational fears? How are you doing them any good by indulging them? At what point will you do them good by luring them from their irrationality? Are you simply going to enable it without end? Where's the Christian ethic in that?
"Maybe, although I know Christians who have taken your "There's no problem with ignoring mask mandates" to "It's a sin to wear a mask" to "We will ignore the law because God commands it." Not biblical at all, and moving right into its own sin component."
Good for you. Are you suggesting this is the position either the RN or I am taking? Why mention it if it doesn't apply to me in any way? And how does your position change THAT irrational and baseless position?
"...if they don't share your conviction and you push them to violate their convictions, there certainly is a sin component."
If their conviction is baseless...based on falsehoods or bad info...I see it as a service to get them to let go of that baseless conviction for their own good. Think of civil law. If someone mistakenly thinks it's illegal to drive down a road that would cut their travel time in half, and your initial attempt to correct their thinking fails, do you just let them waste time and gasoline for the rest of their lives?
"As I said, you're pursuing the standard American liberty..."
I'm pursuing logic, common sense, truth and honesty. I regard those as flowing from my Christian faith...informed by it as I believe American ideals are.
"Call me crazy, but I’m willing to wear a mask when it makes others around me more comfortable."
Call me crazy, but I'm again getting a vibe of prideful sanctimony from you guys. I'm not "willing" to wear a mask ever. I have my standards for when I'll acquiesce. I don't consider pandering to falsehood a demonstration of respect.
Look, Art, once again, I've laid out the biblical reasons that I see X is true and once again you disagree. So, disagree and move on. You can't see how "That which is not of faith is sin" pertains to this subject and I can't see how it doesn't. We won't come to an agreement. You've stated your position -- "You all are crazy" -- and I've stated mine -- "This is what I clearly see in Scripture." Paul clearly said that their conviction that eating meat sacrificed to idols was baseless, but he did not say, "So I flaunted my superior faith in the hope that they would see how irrational their fear of eating meat to idols is." He did not see that as a service to his weaker brethren. You do.
I don't know how to say it any differently and you don't know how to see it any differently so ... move on.
Stan,
Obviously respecting Christians isn’t appropriate.
I’m not sure about sanctimony, but I don’t see what’s unreasonable about deferring to the comfort or preferences of others regarding masks etc.
I’ve never been someone who’s going to try to impose my preferences on others.
"I don't know how to say it any differently and you don't know how to see it any differently so ... move on."
It would help greatly if you would stop misrepresenting my position.
"I’ve never been someone who’s going to try to impose my preferences on others."
It's a two-way street. We're not required to allow others to impose upon us. And herein is one mistake you're making in addressing my problems. Those like me are referring to those who are imposing these worthless and disproved mask mandates. We're not talking about the fearful grandmother you chose to use to attack us.
As to Paul, do you really believe he was content to let those new Christians continue to misunderstand the issue of eating meat sacrificed to idols? That would suggest that Paul wasn't concerned about correcting bad doctrinal understanding. Kinda the opposite of what the point of most of his epistles were...to clarify earlier teachings and correct misunderstandings and heresies. Thus, I've no doubt that Paul was simply referring to how he would deal with those who are mistaken until such time as they come to understand. This makes the most sense and I have no problem with it as it's pretty much where I stand. You seem more concerned with posturing in response.
As to moving on, a good way to help that along is to refrain from taking shots.
I apologize that my shorthand comes across as "shots." Cutting and pasting the lengthy "what I actually said" is a bit tedious. I'll avoid "taking shots" in the future.
Except that there's science that says they do help and others that say they don't, and in the final analysis, you have to choose which ones you're going to believe. I agree with you that they're pointless. But the government says to use them, and people around me believe they work, and because of those 2 facts and that, as you've said repeatedly it's not a moral issue, I will continue to wear my mask. To be an obedient Christian and a good witness, I will do this minor thing.
From a Christian perspective, I look at wearing a mask as one of those “cause others to stumble” issues. If I can help someone else by wearing a mask, then of course I will.
Post a Comment