By: Shafer Parker, FBB Content Director

Back in July the Alberta Court of Appeal unanimously ruled in favour of Calgary Pastor Artur Pawlowski, stating that a lower court was wrong when it found him guilty of contempt of court. Pawlowski had been arrested for holding an illegal public gathering in violation of Alberta's provincial restrictions on large gatherings imposed during the coronavirus pandemic. In addition to clearing Pawlowski, the three-judge panel agreed that Alberta Health Services should pay him and his brother Dawid’s expenses, totaling $15,733.59.

The ruling should be celebrated for its impact on how Alberta government officials approach Charter Rights issues in the future. But even as we celebrate, we must never forget that during the COVID lockdown several other pastors spent time in prison and had their churches closed, and that even now Freedom Convoy leader Tamara Lich remains under house arrest. It should also be of some concern that recent news reports find provincial governments pointing to small rises in COVID cases while hinting darkly that as winter returns further lockdowns may become necessary.

Pastor Artur’s victory notwithstanding, it is likely that if, or when, the lockdowns return, it will be the churches, not the bars and liquor stores that suffer most. Such should not be the case. In my view the first round of lockdowns should have produced more than a handful of heroic pastors. Rather, it should have resulted in legions of pastors, elders, deacons, and Christian laypeople across Canada gathering to sing God’s praise with open faces and full hearts, while daring local governments to do anything about it. This was the approach that won the Roman Empire to the Faith, and it is the only approach that will protect the Crown Rights of King Jesus in our day (Ps. 2:10-12).

God may give the churches a mulligan for failing to rise to the occasion two years ago. After all, it has been decades, if not centuries, since our forefathers and foremothers had to risk anything for their faith, and a lot of reflexive responses from those earlier times were long ago bred out of us. But what if the lockdowns return? We’ve had two years to think about our first responses. Have we used the time well? Are we certain we behaved appropriately? Will the “cloud of witnesses” (Heb. 12:1) be proud of us if we respond the same way next time?

But, comes the objection, what about Romans 13? Doesn’t it tell us to be subject to the governing authorities? Yes, it does, but the passage should not be read as demanding that our obedience to government be absolute. Suppose the government requires doctors to perform abortions. Will that excuse Christian physicians before God? Suppose they are required to euthanize anyone who asks for medical assistance in dying? Are they justified to meekly accept the government’s edict and provide the requested injection? Is it enough to tell their consciences that they are merely operating in the spirit of Romans 13? Would that argument impress the prophet Daniel, or his three friends, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego?

GIVE TODAY!

Then comes the next objection. It’s one thing for the government to order doctors to kill people. But merely asking that churches restrict attendance, distance themselves from one another (no touchy), and wear masks, is not the same thing. Of course, it isn’t. But does that mean that how a church worships, or whether a church worships, is of no consequence? I submit that, contrary to what a lot of people apparently think, the public worship of Christ’s churches is of inestimable importance.

Think of it this way, if a murderer kills a Christian he does some harm, but not as much as you might think, and he might even do some good! Now, before you object, consider life and death from a Biblical point of view. The Christian who dies goes straight to glory, no matter how he dies, and I defy any believer to say that is a bad thing. Moreover, if that Christian’s loved ones are also Christians, not only will their sorrow be lessened by their hope in Christ, their anticipation of their own homegoing may be strengthened. As for the murderer, causing someone’s death may bring about the kind of conviction that leads to repentance, faith, and ultimately heaven, the place where murderer and murdered can celebrate God’s goodness together—forever. That, too, is a good thing.

Please hear me carefully, I am not saying that murder is a good thing. Murder is always a bad thing. But it isn’t always the worst thing. From the Christian perspective some things that are themselves innocuous can, if handled wrong, impact a person’s soul forever. For instance, I’m pretty sure that any time a church allows itself to be diverted from its first duty, i.e., to proclaim the gospel of the kingdom of God, it has done a very bad thing. If we communicate to our children and youth that the public praise of King Jesus is less important than a bureaucrat issuing a public health ruling, we may have damaged that young person’s confidence in God for an eternity. That, by definition, is a bad thing.

So, take just a moment to reconsider Romans 13 with me. In the heroic days of the Reformation, Romans 13 was not considered absolute. As Brian and Sarah Smith have written, the Reformation approach was to say, in summary, “We have a general obligation to obey government because it is ordained by God, [but] because the purpose of ordinances is our good, our specific duty depends on whether the government over us is ‘good and just.’ The line here is very fine—a respect for the rule of law is necessary if rights are to be protected, but a respect for rights is necessary if the law is to fulfil its purpose in any meaningful way.”

Sometimes things can be done in the name of humanity that are actually anti-human. For instance, over the past two years healthcare workers have argued that fundamental rights should not even be considered when public health is at stake. In effect officials have said that to protect people, human beings need to give up a bit of their humanity. In other words, to heal the planet they must learn to do many things alone, including worship. The Smiths suggest, “When reasoning such as this influences decision makers, life itself becomes an idol and the foundation for liberty collapses.” This raises a question; what or whom do you worship? Do you worship life? Or the giver of life? How you answer will make a difference for eternity.

Other Related Topics