Christ, not Caesar

The First Amendment reads, "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."

Like most Americans, I have taken the First Amendment for granted. I have been aware of the attacks on the Second Amendment and the arguments that modern technology was never considered. I find it ironic now that political leaders are restricting the free exercise of religion, and that so many people are appealing to modern technology.

So, you cannot meet in person, just have your service live-streamed, it is no big deal, right? Do you really think that is what our founding fathers intended? I do not. I believe that America was wise to protect religious liberty and not to mandate a religion from the government. My interpretation is that governors asking churches to social distance or wear masks is acceptable. Demanding they close their doors or be fined is not acceptable. It is a violation of the Bill of Rights.

I read that John MacArthur, who leads a mega-church in California, has announced he will not shut down his church as the government is demanding. He is a gifted theologian and has a worldwide ministry known as "Grace to You." In response to Gov. Gavin Newsom, he says, "Christ, not Caesar, is head of the church."

As I have stated in previous columns, there is a line that many in the community of faith will not cross. For MacArthur, the governor has pushed him to that line. I have heard arguments from Christians that we cannot disobey the orders, even if they are illegal. Few are willing to stand against the government.

In that same First Amendment, we read that it is all right to "peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." I do not see a case for riotous mobs to take over city streets. What we have are politicians who cower and cave to angry mobs but are more than happy to arrest or fine churchgoers.

I am thankful that the governor of Missouri has communicated well with church leaders, only making suggestions and not demands. Most churches are like mine, doing everything we know to do to be as safe as any other place where people gather in our city.

In times like these, people need their places of worship more than ever. People are scared, people are grieving, many have lost their jobs and others are living in fear of an uncertain future. We offer hope and peace. Too many people are making the case that we do not need to worship in a church building. They treat it as a privilege when it is a right.

History teaches us that the freedom to worship has been taken away in the past and it can happen again in the future. My wife is half Dutch. We were in the Netherlands visiting relatives a couple years ago. In Amsterdam, we visited a hidden church. The name of the church translates, "Our Dear Lord in the Attic." In 1663, Catholics lost their right to go to church. On the outside, the building appears to be a bourgeois house, but inside is a fully functioning Catholic church.

We hear of an underground church in China, where people meet in secret for fear of punishment from their government. It is unrealistic to think you can keep people from meeting together for worship.

I want to worship freely and openly without any governmental interference as the Bill of Rights suggests. Why don't we leave it to American citizens to decide to watch worship services online or to attend in person?