Message from Tim

Render to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and to God what belongs to God

Helen Gargano has kindly pointed me to an article by a Joshua Jones, a minister in North Hertfordshire, who with some 70 other church leaders is threatening the government with legal action over their decision to close church buildings, arguing that “the call to assemble for worship is not a responsibility that begins with the government, and the government doesn’t have the authority to revoke it.” He says that if the church does not challenge the government on this issue, then it is merely acquiescing in the government’s misuse of authority.

In the early 17th century, Thomas Helwys, a Baptist minister, published a book entitled, A Short Declaration of the Mistery of Iniquity, which made the case for universal religious freedom, irrespective of what anyone did, or did not believe. He wrote, “The King is a mortal man and not God. Therefore he has no power over the immortal souls of his subjects, to make laws and ordinances for them and set spiritual lords over them. If the king has authority to make spiritual lords and laws, then he is an immortal god and not a mortal man ... if the King’s people be obedient and true subjects, obeying all human laws, our lord the King can require no more. For men’s religion to God is between God and themselves. The King shall not answer for it. Neither may the King judge between God and men. Let them be heretics, Jews or whatsoever, it appertains not to the earthly power to punish them in the least measure.” For his temerity he was imprisoned for the rest of his life in Newgate Prison, where he died in 1615 or 1616.

There is no denying that we are living through an unprecedented degree of intrusion into and curtailment of our civil liberties, and I for one I am grateful that Parliament is holding the government to account rather than giving them carte blanche to pass whatever laws they deem necessary in the light of the current crisis. But is there a case to be made for saying that the Government is exceeding the limits of their authority for banning religious gatherings? What makes me cautious about going down this road is that almost all gatherings of two or more people have been made illegal, with a few, very specific (but not always clearly defined) exceptions. So to claim that we should be allowed to gather for prayer and worship entails arguing that we should be exempt from a general rule, and this sounds a bit like special pleading: why should we be allowed to meet when others are not? Certainly, it would be better for the mental health and spiritual wellbeing of our own people if worship services were permitted – but what risk would that entail for our physical health and the health of those with whom we come into contact?

We, like many others, have been caught up in and caught out by yet another Government U-turn. Baptist churches were told just the day before lockdown was announced, that because we “have demonstrated a clear commitment to doing all we can to keep people safe, they are determined to allow places of worship to remain open.” Now, it is ironic that garden centres and off-licenses can stay open, on the grounds that they are deemed to be providers of essential services, while churches have to close. But the sad reality is that the wellbeing of society as a whole does not seem to be unduly affected by whether or not Christians are allowed to gather together for prayer and worship. And if this is a true indication of our impotence and insignificance, then that realisation should cause us significant heart-searching and repentance. Perhaps, rather than angling for a special protected status, our calling is to participate and share in the turmoil which is engulfing so many people’s lives, and to do so in a position of vulnerability. Maybe the uncomfortable truth is that God’s power is actually most clearly revealed through our own weakness.