1. Churches are better elsewhere right now.

Can the government shut down a church? Yes. Congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion. But, the Supreme Court has held that the free exercise clause is not violated if a law is generally applicable to the public and any infringement on the right to practice religion is narrowly tailored to meet a compelling state interest.

There is no argument that shutting down gatherings of more than 10 people is a law of general applicability. There is no argument that there is not a compelling state interest when this virus is projected to kill 100,000-240,000 Americans. That’s more than all of the combat related deaths in every armed conflict the United States has been in since WWII.

Is the law narrowly tailored to meet the state’s interest? The government could mandate that churches perform services in certain ways that minimize exposure to the coronavirus, but the Constitution also says “Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion.” This creates a circular problem. Shutting down a church violates the free exercise clause. Telling a church how to perform religious services violates the establishment clause. That is a very good indication that the law cannot be more narrowly tailored than it already is.

2. Churches can do better than civil disobedience right now.

Peter Jones’s entry in the Dictionary of Scripture and Ethics provides a great framework here. When we talk about civil disobedience, we know that there must be a conflict between God’s law and man’s law when for the believer, God’s law must control. Even in GOd’s law - in Scripture - there is a presumption that we should obey our authorities. That’s in Romans 13, Titus 3, 1 Peter 2, and in other places too. So, if we’re going to be disobedient, the burden is on us to show that it is necessary. A law that prohibits what God demands calls for direct civil disobedience.

The question then is whether government bans on church services during the pandemic prohibits what God requires. On the surface, the answer is yes, it does. God demands that we habitually meet together. Some states now have laws that demand we do not meet together. Therefore, the law prohibits what God demands, right?

Here’s what Jones says. FIrst, we must be diligent about the facts and context. Let’s not forget other facts. Other facts show that it is entirely possible for churches to meet online, and a vast number of churches are doing so. Small groups are meeting via Zoom or Google hangouts. Some churches are having small baptism services for groups of less than 8 or 10 people and wearing protective gear like gloves and masks. Some churches are sending pastors and deacons into homes to administer the Lord’s supper to groups of less than 8 or 10 people. Our inability to think outside the box does not justify civil disobedience here.

Jones goes on to say that civil disobedience should be a last resort. We know this pandemic has an expiration date. We know there are other things we can do. We could even engage in litigation if necessary to regain permission to meet together, which no one has had time to pursue yet. We’ve not reached the point of last resort.

Jones continues to argue that the moral objections to these bans must outweigh the moral objections to the disobedience. Disobedience here could lead to nothing more than dead Christians. I’m not discounting God’s power to protect and heal, but considering how the church can continue to meet and minister and the possibility of further degradation of Christian influence in our society because we disobeyed and expel died, I think the moral objections to disobedience outweigh the moral objections to being ordered not to.

Here is the last thing Jones says: if we disobey, we should expect and accept punishment for breaking the law. That level of commitment to your convictions is what makes civil disobedience effective. It’s what made Nelson Mandela and Martin Luther King, Jr. effective. So if you feel the Spirit leading you to disobey and meet as a church, expect and accept the consequences of that. Otherwise, your disobedience is ineffective.

3. Churches better in pandemic will be better after pandemic.

A 16th century proverb says “mater artium necessitas” - the mother of invention is necessity. Public schools have lagged behind on remote learning. Necessity right now has birthed a much better grasp of what is necessary to use technology to meet as a church. We’ve taken a break from our technology and the law series to address coronavirus, but this is a great transition back into that topic.

Church leaders have largely bought into the notion that the church’s website is the new front door. Many would be guests will make up their mind about the church before they ever step foot in it. But we’ve not done a great job carrying that to its logical conclusion. Our live streams and recordings of our services are not ...