Obedience to the 4th Commandment?

The following question was sent to me and though the blogosphere is chock full of this stuff, I thought I would include my reply. I do this mainly because in my perusal of online opinion-making I think most of it has been hasty, overly emotional, and sadly harsh. I think we all need to take a breath and remember not only our mortality but also our severe intellectual and physical limitations. We are not in control. We are not all-wise. This whole episode is a call to repentance and humility and an opportunity for compassion.

Here is the question, slightly edited:

"Our county issued an order prohibiting any public or private gatherings that are not essential activities. The order does not directly mention or name religious institutions directly, but I suspect they are included. The order says there will be punishments of fines and/or imprisonment for offenders. But how could we cancel the Divine Service when our people are in the greatest need—just because Caesar told us to? Yet I keep jumping back to the 4th commandment. Do you have any thoughts? I thought I remember Lutheran churches closing for a time during the Spanish influenza."

Here is my response. In line with what I wrote above, please don't think this is the final answer or the best answer or the only answer. It is my attempt to process the information with what I know is true and what I have been called to do, not my attempt to establish policy or judge others.

"I think there are two issues with the 4th commandment. In the first place, is the government refusing to allow us to preach the Gospel and/or administer the Sacrament? If they say we can't worship God because it offends Caesar, then we know what to do. But what if they ask us to temporarily refrain from public worship? We could do that, but how many weeks is too much and a burden that God's people can't bear? When do they cross the line? Do their intentions matter? I don't know.

The second question is if the government in the United States, by its own standards, has this power. What about the right to peaceful assembly and the right to exercise our religion? When is civil disobedience appropriate? Would the supreme court agree that the government officials can take away these rights if they themselves, without a vote or a law, deem that it would be efficient and useful to do so?  I don't mean to say that you should not go along with the request because I don't know if you should or not, but I don't think the 4th commandment is that clear cut about what you should do in our context. For example, maybe in modern Germany or Canada Christians can’t have guns without breaking the 4th commandment because their governments forbid it. But here, even if some official says that I can’t have a gun, I can. Disobeying him in that unlawful command is not sin. Is the right to peaceful assembly and free exercise of religion the same sort of thing? I don’t think we’ve really had to think about this before. In any case, I don’t think it is fair to simply say that the 4th commandment trumps everything and we should just obey.

The 5th commandment is likely more in play. Does your gathering endanger the community at large by hastening the spread of the disease? Again: I don't know. There are lots of people screaming that it does. They have charts and statistics. There are lots of people screaming that it doesn't. They also have charts and statistics and both sides have experts.

I suspect that we don't have the real story from China. I suspect that this virus hasn't been studied enough to know how quickly it can mutate or what long term effects might be and so forth. For all we know, long term, we’d be better off if it went quickly and only killed 1/2 a million Americans instead of dragging it out and giving it a chance to live longer and adapt. Medicine is an imprecise art of trial and error, but it puts on the air of engineering. It is not engineering. It is not mathematics and geometry. It is far too complicated and entails a lot of guesswork. I doubt the government knows the best thing to do, but how am I to evaluate all the claims my members are making about what their expert relatives are supposedly saying? It seems as though everyone knows someone who is a real expert.

So if we don't have good information that enables us to make truly informed decisions, we err on the side of compassion and seek to do no harm while doing good. What is the kind thing in this situation, the safe and right thing? That is not so straight forward in my mind. Are we compassionate to those whose consciences are burdened and sincerely desire the Sacrament? Do we rebuke those who are panicking at the thought of not receiving the Sacrament every week as though God does not provide through His Word or that the Holy Spirit will flee if we cannot come to Church?

Or are we kind to those who are afraid that our gathering would endanger the community by quickening the spread of the disease? How much do we consider our reputation among our neighbors who know almost nothing of the Sacrament and think we are endangering them for a ritual or ceremony? Will gathering actually undermine our witness or would gathering do the opposite and show the world that we trust in Christ and His promises in all circumstances? I don't know.

I think we ought to tread lightly. We should not be overly harsh with one another over these opinions about the best way to respond nor should we be afraid to change our minds and adapt our practice as we move forward. We ought to try to be kind to both groups and reserve our private judgments for ourselves, seeking to carry out our duties as faithfully as possible.

For the time being then, my plan is to attempt to conform to the government’s suggestions or orders for group sizes as much as possible by having as many services, even private services, as possible. I heard something last night, which may not be true, that San Francisco is banning people from having any gatherings at all, including having extended family or friends over for dinner. Barring that sort of requirement, in extreme circumstances, the pastor could, if he himself is symptom-free, go to homes where the people are symptom-free who want him to come and give them the sacrament or have those families come to Church for the Sacrament. If the whole country ends up in a situation where the government bans us from seeing our children or parents and visiting neighbors and such the way it was described (maybe falsely) in San Francisco, I would likely not comply and make the argument that our services are as essential as medical care.

Throughout all of this, we should make much use of the telephone. Let's talk to our people. Let's comfort them with the Word and pray with them. And, of course, we can also use other media to carry the Word and should do so.

May God bless you in your service and your sorrow, bringing you, your family, and your people closer to Him and deeper into the reality that He is good and this life is temporary."