Covid-19, Romans 13, the Church and loving our neighbour

The following are the notes I took from Rev. Gavin Beers' (FCC) webinar presentation on April 27.

My comments are in italics.

The following must be borne in mind in the current debate over whether the Church should or shouldn't submit to the magistrate when the magistrate limits gatherings.

A. Biblical relationship between Church and state

The Church and State are two independent governments, but both are under Christ.  

The Church has the keys of kingdom

The State has the sword of justice

Neither is to encroach on the jurisdiction of other - Everyone agrees the government shouldn't meddle in the sacraments or church discipline, but we seem to have lost sight of the fact that when the government limits gatherings to 5 it is meddling in the things of religion in the most fundamental sense. They are not simply telling the Church what to do when she gathers, they are telling her she cannot gather at all. She is telling us, in effect, to set us aside the first four commandments for the 5th and 6th commandments (assuming we buy their narrative)

Both of these - the Church and State - must exercise their authority according to the same moral law. What is that law? Both tables of the law found in the 10 commandments! The first table consists of the first 4 commandments, and the second table consists of the 6 commandments

There is an interdependence between them Church and State.  The Church has a prophetic voice to the State, and the magistrate is to promote true religion.  The State has power around but no power in things of religion pertaining to worship, discipline etc.  Isaiah 49:23, Isaiah 60

Consider some New Testaments passages:

1. Render to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God’s - who defines what belongs to Caesar?  God does!  The whole moral law.  Not just one half.  Whole of moral law

2. Romans 13. God says here that the magistrate is a minister of God for good and a terror to evil. We must bear in mind that the evil and good moral qualities are defined by moral law 

B. Relationship between first and second tables of law

There is a priority.

First things are first table: duty to God is first!

Second things are the second table: duty man is second!

God places priority on first table. We are not hearing that in the debate we are having. All the discussion surrounds the 5th and 6th commandments. What about the first 4?

Israel and Caanan's chief sin was idolatry

Christ said the great commandment is to love God (Matthew 22)

In Matthew 6 Jesus said, "Seek ye first the kingdom of God"

Bear in mind the call to Christian discipleship: lay down your life (Matthew 10, 16), hate everything else relatively speaking (Luke 14, Matthew 10) in reference to first table duties toward God

This priority not recognized by State and sadly not recognized right now by Church

We have a duty to obey 5th commandment but that duty is not absolute - must obey God rather than man (Acts 5:29)

Duty to 6th commandment but it is also not absolute - love and obey God more than life

What about our duty to the first table?  Especially in our assembling for public worship?

What is public worship?  It is the highest form of Christian service!  It is the holy convocation of saints with the peculiar promise of his presence and blessing, and it is issued by a divine call through the Church not the State; and the State is to promote and encourage the fulfillment of that call

That is NOT being factored in by state or even Church

We are hearing implicit obedience to State (5th commandment) on basis of public health (6th commandment) even when it calls us to set aside the call to public worship and therefore the first 4 commands

Church mitigates this problem by the use of modern technology 

Virtual worship is not public worship. It is at best enhanced private or family worship and blurs fundamental worship

Imagine no phones, no computers, no ipads. This is a fundamental question. If there weren't the technology there would be no church.  That is the basic question.  Must not let modern technology blur the fundamental question

The State should be consulting Church

No factoring in by the State of the importance of public worship nor of the fact that present health risk can be managed by observing procedures and protocols

C. Our History

First, they (our forefathers) knew a lot more about disease than given credit for - very similar measures to our own

When there were pandemics/plagues commerce was limited, borders were closed, large gatherings were shut, but churches were rarely if ever shut… if they were closed they were the last and if so encouraged to go to a more commodious place

Second, we find that there were actually more public worship services at those times (not less)!  They multiplied assemblies for prayer and worship

The reason was that the magistrate understood he was to rule according to both tables

Worship was considered essential

Complete paradigm shift now in association with godlessness

D. Our Hypocrisy

We can go to Walmart and mingle with lots of people, go to print shops, go to factories etc. Many of our people doing these things because essential… 

There is also the hypocrisy I see all around me of Christians breaking the law for fellowship with friends and family. They break the law to for fellowship but will not break it for worship.

We flood streets for gun rights, in Michigan people protest lock down, but no noise being made about God’s rights for public worship

We are told we should obey the public health mandate - would we take the same line when it comes to family?  What if vaccines were made mandatory?  Government would use same arguments - its for the preservation of life and not getting the vaccines is a risk to health!  But the family would be willing to obey

G. Beers disobeyed the government constantly in Scotland when he disciplined his children 

Wasn’t persecution of Christians! Same with vaccines, same today, but doubt we would hear Romans 13 used in same way as we are hearing now with regard to church but today Church is saying "comply comply comply." The logic is fundamentally inconsistent