The Legacy Church in Albuquerque is saddened. “Due to persecution by the state of New Mexico and the governor’s office, our offices are closed to the public,” the website said. “Admission is by appointment only.”
It’s about a meeting on Christmas Eve. Hundreds of parishioners gathered without regard for social distancing. Most of them didn’t wear masks. A similar meeting took place in another mega-church, the Calvary Chapel. The New Mexico Department of Health has threatened fines, but the churches have so far remained defiant.
The Calvary Chapel said when the crowd showed up for the Christmas Eve service, the church “decided not to break fellowship with any worshiper by requiring them to leave their church family congregation.”
Legacy Church was braver. “We took the pandemic seriously from the start and took prudent measures,” Legacy officials said. “But when governments transgress their constitutional authority and contradict what God calls us to do, we respond to his authority first.”
………………………………………….. …………..
I find it remarkable how quickly the rhetoric of these megachurches is turning into the standard mode of religious law: victimization and religious persecution.
Do these churches have a case? Maybe. The first change guarantees the “free practice” of religion. Other courts, including the Supreme Court, have refused to say health policies are placing an undue burden on religious organizations amid the coronavirus pandemic. However, the first amendment should rightly receive a lot of respect.
However, I wonder if there is another way. Unless I miss my guess, these mega-churches are tax-exempt organizations, which means they don’t pay property taxes – or any other taxes – on their various properties. This in turn means that the public has been subsidizing these organizations for many years. ordinary citizens have to make up the difference for local services, from parks and sanitation to police and fire protection. (I am not questioning this policy, which I generally think is good. The founders recognized the value of voluntary associations.)
What if the leaders of these churches took a deep breath and stepped back? Perhaps, instead of condemning the governor and health officials as agents of the dark, they could choose to be model citizens and neighbors. An alternative could look something like this:
“We disagree with the governor and state health officials, and we really want to resume Church meetings. But we also understand that the public has subsidized our churches and our services for many decades. Recognizing this, we strive to be responsible citizens amid this unprecedented health crisis and will therefore explore other avenues to continue our ministry. Instead of pursuing litigation or redress, we want to step back despite believing we have a strong legal argument. “
Unfortunately, these mega-churches have chosen to defy the health authorities and play the sacrifice while claiming greater fidelity to God. Fair enough. But leaders of these churches may also want to consider a passage from the New Testament, Paul’s letter to Titus, that reads in part: “But avoid stupid controversy, genealogy, disagreement, and disputes about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. ”
Recognizing longstanding public subsidies could lead to a more measured and accountable course. With time and with a common spirit of collaboration, we can leave this pandemic behind and return to some semblance of normalcy – including attending church meetings.
Randall Balmer, an episcopal priest, is visiting professor in the Religious Studies program at the University of New Mexico. He is the author of more than a dozen books, including the upcoming “Solemn Reverence: The Separation of Church and State in America”.