The 81-year-old John MacArthur is no stranger to controversy. Several decades ago, he penned a few books on Lordship that became best-sellers. Little did he know that evangelicals were interested in deep theology. Back then, he was concerned that Christians were taking the Gospel call to discipleship too flippantly. He noted that “the gospel call to faith presupposes that sinners must repent of their sin and yield to Christ’s authority.” The proposition was simple, but the opposition was massive.
Fast forward three decades, the octogenarian is still preaching each Sunday at Grace Community Church in California on the Lordship of Jesus. My differences with John MacArthur over the years have been significant, though what I find as I get older is that my admiration for pastors who have fought the good find for over 50 years increases. Adding to the list of controversies in MacArthur’s history is his now nationally recognized position that Jesus is Lord over governments and it is the duty of ecclesiastical bodies to disobey the government when it forbids worship (see Saturday’s post).
As a result of this decision to keep the church doors open, there are some indications that the local governments plan to shut down electricity should this happen again. This may be a mere threat as a way of discouraging gatherings. I would find that appalling, but California has been appalling for a long time.
MacArthur’s decision has been met with mixed reviews. Those who acquiesce to the status quo and say that MacArthur has no right to defy the government on the matter of worship and that we should submit to it willingly are mistaken, and I confess at this point, have only fragments of my respect. Others, more coherent voices, have articulated that there are some additional options that MacArthur has not contemplated and that he should do so as a way of setting a good example to other churches. It should be noted that these same voices are also cheering on the decision of J.D. Greer to cancel corporate gathering until 2021 and establish “house church” models until then. I cannot even begin to tell you the danger of such an approach, especially considering the after effects of decisions like these to the ecclesiastical ethos of modern evangelicals. These decisions assume that evangelicals in this country have a high ecclesiology. This can be the point of no-return for many large churches.
One response to MacArthur that caught my attention is that the elders of Grace Community Church should consider that this is not the right battle for our time. The real battle is the LGBT community and that the church should save energy to exercise those muscles on that issue instead of “spending down our capital on pandemics.”
But it has been over 150 days since the pandemic started! When is it time to say enough?! The problem is not exercising our muscles on this issue, the problem is not exercising strongly enough! We have caved into the either-or dilemma. The Christian church possesses the keys of heaven and hell (Mat. 16:19), therefore she does not have to wait to exercise anything at a future date, she should be ready to exercise her authority whenever she deems right.
The LGBT issue will come, but if the church cannot establish the centrality of worshiping as one now–with whatever protocols necessary for the protection of the saints–she will have no stamina or logic or grace to take on other pressing matters later. Once again, the proposition is simple and the opposition will surely be massive.
Pastor Brito,
You seem to offer two views which oppose MacArthur’s statement 1) support continued lockdowns because churches don’t have the right to defy lawful authorities or 2) support taking other actions prior to defying the state. But many of us are in favor of MacArthur defying the lockdown, or at least think it is his prudential decision to make, but are concerned about all of the cheerleading we see in our own circles regarding MacArthur’s wooden and historically illiterate rendition of sphere sovereignty. This is my approach and it seems to be the approach of Tim Bayly: https://warhornmedia.com/2020/08/10/thoughts-on-grace-community-church/
Even Littlejohn’s piece was mostly a corrective on the history and doctrine. He was explicit that there may be a time to disobey orders, and he gave several lines of argument that could lead someone to conclude differently than him about the wisdom of defying the orders or not.
I don’t see why we can’t criticize a potentially dangerous misreading of the relationship between church and state, while agreeing that the current lockdowns are insufferable and there are good arguments to be made against them!