As the coronavirus pandemic prompts more governors to issue stay-at-home orders, some Christian leaders believe that the pressure to cancel services infringes on religious liberty.
Governors have taken divergent positions on how to handle the question of religious freedom during a pandemic. In states such as New York and Ohio, churches are exempted from bans on large gatherings but are nevertheless recommended to abide by them. Michigan, too, does not include churches in its ban, but only after Republican state legislators convinced Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer that shutting down worship services could constitute a conflict between church and state.
In states such as Louisiana and Indiana, governors ordered that no more than 10 people can gather in any public space, including for worship. In Virginia, Gov. Ralph Northam on Tuesday declared it a misdemeanor until April 23 to attend a church service with more than 10 people. These orders have inspired pushback from pastors, who, citing the First Amendment, say that they should be allowed to make that decision for themselves.
Tony Spell, pastor of the Life Tabernacle Church in Louisiana, called Democratic Gov. John Bel Edwards’s executive order “politically motivated.” In defiance, Spell held a service last Tuesday that more than 300 people attended. In his sermon, which was livestreamed on Facebook, Spell called on other pastors to also hold services and “not let the fear of persecution of any government official, any dictator law, prevent you from worshiping God, which our First Amendment states you are not allowed to do in any form.”
When police arrived to break up the service, Spell said, on the grounds of “religious rights,” he would continue to “assemble no matter what someone says.”
At the time, Edwards’s order stated that no more than 50 people could gather in any space. That Sunday, as Louisiana became one of the worst-hit states in the coronavirus pandemic, Edwards issued the order limiting gatherings to 10 people. Spell held another service, this time attracting more than 1,000 people, across the church’s seven campuses.
On Tuesday, Spell also held a service, in which he told congregants that they would be healed if they contracted the coronavirus. Before the service, Spell told CNN that the Louisiana order that did not count churches as “essential,” and therefore exempt from the ban on large gatherings, was an attack on religious liberty.
“If they close every door in this city, then I will close my doors,” Spell said. “But you can’t say the retailers are essential but the church is not. That is a persecution of the faith.”
In Tennessee, Greg Locke, pastor of the Global Vision Bible Church, put up similar resistance after Republican Gov. Bill Lee said on Sunday that churches are “risking people’s lives” if they continue to hold services. Locke said that his church is an “essential service” for the community and that he plans to keep it open.
“It’s not about everybody else’s faith. It’s about my faith. It’s my conviction, and so we want to just leave the church open to be a hub in the community to help people that need us,” Locke told the Tennessean. “They need somebody standing to give hope in all the chaos, and so we’re just offering hope, so that’s why we’re staying open.”
Locke, who has an active online following, also claimed in a tweet that Facebook had removed one of his posts advertising his church services for “coordinating harm and promoting crime.”
The question of religious freedom during a pandemic relies heavily on the gravity of the circumstances, said Ryan Tucker, director for Christian Ministries at Alliance Defending Freedom, a group that specializes in religious liberty cases. State governments, he said, can ask churches to close or move their services online so long as they show “compelling interest” for doing so.
“During this extraordinary time, it’s conceivable the current situation involving this global pandemic may qualify as a compelling government interest,” he wrote to church leaders facing restrictions of religious practice.
But, Tucker added, governments still must respect churches by the “least restrictive means.”
“In this case, temporary, evenly applied restrictions may satisfy that standard,” he said. “But if these restrictions are unnecessarily prolonged or strengthened or if religion is targeted by some government body, then that analysis may change.”
In Indiana, the question of the “least restrictive means” has already arisen within the state Justice Department. State Attorney General Curtis Hill on Tuesday corrected Allen County Health Commissioner Deborah McMahan for an order that he said contained “unconstitutional religious discrimination” because it specifically targeted churches in a stay-at-home order.
The order, which McMahan stood by, banned groups of more than 10 people gathering for religious reasons or in church buildings. It was issued in response to the decision of some churches to continue meeting in small groups on church properties.
Indiana has since issued a statewide stay-at-home order, which includes limits on gathering sizes for church services.
Even in states where churches are exempt from bans, some churches have worried that to close would be to cave into restrictions on religious expression. This week, Solid Rock, an evangelical church in Ohio, announced on its website that the church will not close during the pandemic outbreak. It cited the First Amendment’s guarantees of “freedom concerning religion, expression, and assembly” in its reasoning.
“We are respectful of every individual’s right to choose either to come to our service or to watch online,” church leadership said. “We do believe that it is important for our doors to remain open for whomever to come to worship and pray during this time of great challenge in our country.”
