A Response to Michael Krahn's Open Letter

There are some things that Michael Krahn has written that I appreciate and agree with.   I agree, for example, that the threats against the mayor of Aylmer are "evil and cowardly," and I agree that we ought to be praying for our civil leaders (1 Timothy 2).  

But Krahn's letter is overly simplistic and (I think) unfair to those on the other side.  Here I want to respond - as a local(ish) pastor - to his 7 "thoughts and commitments."

1. Krahn writes: "Defiance is sometimes necessary, but blind defiance is no better than blind obedience. Blind defiance and blind obedience are both unhealthy, knee-jerk reactions. Informed defiance and informed obedience can have a conversation; blind defiance and blind obedience can only have conflict. I will stay informed, enter many conversations, and  follow the laws of my province while at the same time making it known that I think there are better ways. This is how a healthy democracy works."   

This sounds fine in principle.  Who will disagree with him when he says "blind defiance is no better than blind obedience?"  But who said the protestors in Aylmer are blindly defiant?  Had I the opportunity to join the protests I would have.  I wanted to go to support what I believe is a worthy cause.  But Krahn simply brushes it off as blind defiance.  Where is the basis for this claim?  I have written extensively on my informed civil disobedience, and I know I speak for many others when I say that our reasons are based on careful thought, research, discussion and often many hours of prayer!  It isn't easy to opt out of the mask (for example).  If you haven't tried you should.  Seriously, try it.  Go a week without a mask and discover what it is like for those of who (for conscience reasons) refuse it.  Experience the so-called freedom that we are being told hasn't been taken from us.  Walk a mile in our shoes before brushing off our efforts as blind and uninformed. 

2.  Krahn adds, "Of all the things Canadian Christians could be at this point, I think grateful ranks near the top. We have more freedoms than people in most other countries do, our governments, while imperfect, are responsive as they adapt to a situation that is still developing, and our worship spaces have fewer restrictions than almost all other similar spaces. (Thank you, Premier Ford)." 

I recently watched (the more wholesome parts of) Schindler's List again.  I found Krahn's statement eerily familiar.  Did you know that the Jews in the ghettos would encourage each other in a similar fashion?  After all, it could be so much worse!  They had some freedoms didn't they?   Not everything had been taken from them.  Sadly, they didn't seem to realize what was coming.  

I have heard others reason like Krahn in this same fashion: "We have more freedoms than people in most other countries."  I suppose that will always be true.  Or, at least, there will always be some place worse off.  As a Christian I am grateful for what we have.  Gratitude should always mark the life of a believer.  But gratitude for what we have does not excuse silence or complicity in evil.  Certainly not all our freedoms have been taken from us, but are we really going to wait until then?  Shall we allow the government to slowly, as if by piecemeal, strip our freedoms from us one by one until there is nothing left?  When will it be okay to protest?  When are we allowed 'fight' back?  

The fact is we have lost a number of our freedoms in recent months.  The government has taken them from us without following due process.  These things have not been written into law, they have not been worked out in the courts, they have not been worked through in parliament.  Instead, we have given our authorities (often medical officers) almost unilateral authority to take whatever they deem necessary.  

What worries me most is that the citizens of this country have allowed this, while encouraging one another with the assurance that we still have many freedoms.  Anyone with a grasp of 20th century history realizes this is a deadly mindset.  Consider masking for example.  I know many readers choose to wear a mask.  I am personally fine with that.  But does it worry you that the government has been allowed to require masks of the rest of us simply at their say so?  We have allowed them to do this, and if they can do it with masks sooner or later they will do it with something else.

3. Krahn says, "I do not believe that freedom means I don’t have to submit to anyone’s authority. God has placed people in places of authority (Romans 13:1-7) and it is my privilege and duty to submit to their authority (1 Peter 2:13-17) unless they compel me to do something that God considers sin (Acts 5:27-32). If I was convinced that this is what’s happening right now, I would be the one organizing and leading the protests. (I am, after all, a PROTESTant pastor.)."

So who is he writing to (or about)?  Has he met the Christian who believes we needn't "submit to anyone's authority?"  I haven't.  This seems a bit of a straw man to me.  Ironically, he admits he would be organizing and leading the protests if he believed the government were compelling him to do something God considers sin.  I wonder if he has been listening to other side.  This is precisely how they are reasoning!  Those of us calling for civil disobedience have argued that we must obey God rather than man.  We have argued that the government has overstepped and intruded where they have no right to intrude.  We have argued that we must give to Caesar what is his and to God what is His.  But instead of interacting with our arguments Krahn simply shrugs the movement off as if it had never occurred to any of us that "God has placed people in places of authority."  

But I wonder what Krahn would do if the government were to target someone else?  Assuming they aren't already...  

Seriously.  

Ask yourself, what if my government isn't requiring me to sin?  So far so good.   But what responsibility do you have toward your neighbour, your fellow citizen?  Does it matter if the government strips their freedoms from them?  Shall they - the government - be allowed to do whatever they please so long as you aren't required to sin?  

4.  Michael Krahn's next point is interesting: "I will not use my platform as a pastor to grandstand, collect followers, encourage rebellion, or make myself feel important. I will not confuse my calling as a pastor for an unexpressed but obvious aspiration to enter politics. I have no desire to be Aylmer’s most influential unelected politician. If I want to be a politician, I should run for office in the next election." 

Wonderful.  I have no issue with anything he has said here.  But what is he actually trying to say?  Why is this important to announce in an open letter?  I can't help but wonder if Krahn is trying to say something about someone else without actually saying it.  If so, I prefer the more direct approach.

5.  Fifth, he says, "I will look first to the Bible to guide my thought and behaviour, not to the constitution of the great country in which I live. As I use the words of scripture, I will use them responsibly and according to their context. Parachuting out-of-context biblical passages into a speech doesn’t make the speech stronger. All it does is bring dishonour and disrepute to the scriptures." 

I wish I knew what he was referring to here, but I don't - which is actually deeply unfair because he is making a serious accusation without backing it up.  Who is "parachuting out-of-context biblical passages?"  Who by doing so is bringing "dishonour and disrepute to the Scriptures."  These are serious accusations... and he may be perfectly right.  I have no idea because like many readers I have no idea what he is referring to.  But for those who are 'in the know' this is profoundly unfair.  Demonstrate that the biblical texts have been cited out of context before publicly claiming that someone has brought "dishonour and disrepute to the Scriptures."  

6. Krahn next says, "I will not use the language of peace while hinting at insurrection. Inferring that those who abide by the mask mandate would have been Nazi supporters in earlier times is a dangerous and disgusting tactic. And after all, if your enemies are Nazis then violence is warranted, isn’t it? If anything, forcing a derogatory label on other community members – as if it were a visible badge – is the behaviour that needs to be called out. (I know that protest organizers can’t control every element of a public protest, but I do hope they will publicly rebuke this element of the protest if it is again on display, as it was at the last protest. See picture below.)."  In this case see the picture above.

I am not so sure the tactic is dangerous or disgusting.  Actually, I think it has its place.  But let me answer the objection:

First, no one said anyone is a Nazi.  

Second, they are not calling mask wearers Nazi supporters.  They are comparing complicity today with complicity in the past.  The sign reads, "If you've ever wondered whether you would have complied in Nazi Germany... now you know."   Many who complied (then) did so hesitatingly and even unwillingly.  They weren't Nazi supporters, they weren't hateful, they just went along because there seemed to be no alternative.  So it is today.  Many who are complying are doing so only because there seems to be no alternative.

Third, the sign is meant to make people think.    And we need to think!  I wish more people would read 1984 and The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.  If they did I am certain there would be a far greater outcry than there is now.

The point of the sign as I see it is simply this... That the Germany of 1939 did not happen overnight.  There was a gradual eroding of freedoms, even as we are witnessing in Canada in 2020.  It is easy in hindsight to say, "I would never have stood for that, I would never have been complicit with such evil;" but hindsight is always 20/20.  I don't believe the maker (or carrier) of the sign meant to suggest that the problems we are facing are exactly equivalent to those faced by the people of Nazi Germany.  Rather, they are comparing complicity with complicity.  Then - as now - freedoms were gradually stripped from the people bit by bit.  The horrors that we are all familiar with came toward the end, but what paved the way for those later horrors was that quiet complicity of Germans to the earlier erosion of long held freedoms.    

7. Finally, he says, "I will continue to do what I can to love and remain in conversation with the people in my community, regardless of what they believe about masks or vaccines or any other hot topic."

My first thought was "good, something we can agree on;" but if he really wanted to show an openness to conversation with the other side he would have given them a fair hearing.  He would have written fairly interacting with their own arguments rather than merely dismissing them in the way he has.  I hope he will do as he commits to do here, but I don't think his letter will help.

Conclusion

I have no doubt that Michael Krahn is a sincere man who loves the Lord and the Church.  But I am seriously disappointed with what he is written.  In the same way that the pastor he mentions doesn't represent the rest of 'us', so Krahn's letter does not represent the rest of us either.   

Actually, I have never met "the one pastor" who "is constantly in the limelight."   I assume he means Henry Hildebrandt of the Church of God.*  I don't know all that Hildebrandt's church stands for, though I know there are many points on which we are disagreed.  What I have appreciated is his courageous stand against the outrageous overreach of our government.  I appreciated his willingness to gather his congregation for worship when doing so was forbidden.  And I particularly appreciated his courage to do so publicly, risking what few other ministers were willing to risk.  Whatever our differences, on that score he has my respect.**

A word to those of you irritated by the protests: have you stopped to consider why these people are giving up their Saturdays?  It isn't easy being a minority voice particularly when you know that so many will react toward you with visceral hostility.  Yet these people take that risk because they love their country and many also do so out of love for their Lord.  You may not agree with them at the moment, but please at least show them respect... and hear them.      

A parting thought

It deeply worries me - and should worry you - to see how effective the media propaganda has been: 

• one month telling us one thing and the next telling us another, all without any accountability;
• originally emphasizing deaths to Covid-19 now emphasizing cases - but always in a way calculated to strike fear into the hearts of the masses making them ripe for whatever the government will ask next.   
• harping always day after day on one single relatively innocuous virus as if there were no other diseases. 

Have you considered what the country would look like without television?  Or how you would think and even feel about the world, the government, masks and Covid if you had no television?  Without media there would be far far less fear... if fear at all.  Why?  Because 8 months into this most of us know no one who has died of Covid and many of us still have yet to meet one person who has even contracted the illness; a disease whose mortality rate is significantly lower than H1N1.  

Its time we stood up and said "enough."  We have allowed our freedoms to be taken from us for too long.  For too long we have allowed them to get us to wear the mask on the pretext that its for the other guy.  For too long we have swallowed their pseudoscience and their lies without a word of protest.  No more.  Let's remember what our grandparents fought for and determine - afresh - that they will not have fought and died in vain.  

---------------

Correction - 8:19 PM:  I was just recalling that 1984 is actually quite disgusting at points.  As such I would not recommend it to anyone.   If there is a children's version of the book perhaps that would be helpful.     

* October 21, 2021 Update: For my thoughts on the Church of God in Aylmer please follow the link.

** January 14, 2022 Update: For further (more informed) comments on Henry Hildebrandt and the CoG go here.