John MacArthur and the Curious Case of the Missing Masks
A case study in how political tribalism degrades Christian discernment
Above: Grace Community Church’s August 9 service. Source
The Church in an Age of Tribalism
We are living in a tribal age. Americans have always been divided along political, regional, ethnic, and religious lines, but to an increasing degree, our society is marked by a bitter conflict between two tribal coalitions: the “conservatives” and the “progressives.” What holds these political and cultural tribes together is not agreement around a set of coherent principles, but instead a deeply-felt loathing of the other tribe, and a fear of what would happen if the enemy tribe were to get more power. (Some cultural commentators call this phenomenon “negative partisanship”). While the beliefs of the two tribes are very different, their practices are remarkably similar. Both have their respective political party and public figures. Both are fueled by media outlets that actively promote fear and loathing of the opposite tribe, and work furiously to spin every event into further evidence of the righteousness of one tribe and the villainy of the other. Both believe that the other tribe is an apocalyptic threat to American liberty and security, and must be defeated at all costs.
As I shared in my introductory post, I’m convinced that the American church has been fatally compromised by its affiliation to either of these tribes. Too much of American Christianity has become a messy mishmash of Christian faith and tribal identity (again, on both the right and the left). This syncretism can never, in my opinion, lead to a vibrant Christian witness in today’s world. The agendas of these tribes are not driven by love, but by fear and anger. Their political and cultural visions are shallow, dehumanizing, and incomplete. As Tim Keller masterfully argued in a recent article, the biblical vision of justice and flourishing is incompatible with all of today’s partisan agendas.
Unsurprisingly, churches with a low view of biblical authority tend to be very vulnerable to being hijacked by a partisan agenda. What is much more troubling, in my opinion, is how so many churches who claim to be guided by Scripture in their worldview are also, ironically, becoming torch-bearers for partisan tribalism. I have seen this phenomenon spread throughout the Evangelical world in my life, and the Trump era has accelerated the problem.
To those who already agree with me so far: thanks for coming along for the ride, but I’m not writing to you. If you are confused and offended by this introduction, I urge you to keep reading. My hope is that this blog will lead you to start asking difficult, but vital questions about Christian discernment in an age of tribalism.
The Tribal Church in the Age of Coronavirus
Enter COVID-19 in early 2020, approximately three years ago (or so it feels). Pandemics are always awful, but partisan tribalism in America has turned a bad situation into a truly terrible one, by making it utterly impossible for Americans to unite together to fight the coronavirus. It is central to partisan tribal identity to do and think the opposite of what the other tribe is doing and thinking. The tribes are also diametrically different in the sources of authority they trust. If one tribe trusts a certain government agency or news channel or public figure or institution, the other tribe must view them as untrustworthy and even sinister.
The practical result has been massive divergences in how Americans view the threat from COVID-19, as well as the measures to stop it. The conservative tribe downplayed the virus as overblown and “basically the flu”, and openly opposed shutting down the economy. Progressives, in turn, painted conservatives as a “death cult” who were willing to sacrifice the elderly to the god of capitalism. Conservative social media began to explode with conspiracy theories about a biological warfare plot to stop Trump’s re-election and spread government control to all areas of life. The common link between the rhetoric of both tribes is a willingness to make extraordinary, sweeping claims about the other side’s motives and character, without sufficient evidence to back up these claims. Acrimony has overridden the need for evidence, it seems.
The pandemic has put churches in a particularly difficult spot. Every church leader in America has had to scramble to make sense of the unfolding situation, trying to maintain community in a way that doesn’t endanger the faithful (or their neighbors). Compounding the problem has been confusing and sometimes contradictory information from health agencies and public authorities. It’s a tough time, but also an important one. In times of crisis, people look to the church for comfort and wisdom. But there’s also a huge temptation for churches to copy and paste partisan narratives into their pandemic response. The consequences, as we’ll see below, are significant.
John MacArthur and COVID-19
For those unfamiliar, John MacArthur is one of the most influential teachers, preachers, and writers in the Evangelical Protestant world. From his pulpit at Grace Community Church in southern California, he has reached millions all over the world. I briefly served on staff at a church who modeled themselves around MacArthur and his ministries, and I have many friends and family members who venerate and respect him. MacArthur deserves credit for helping many people explore the Bible more deeply, and love Jesus more fully. However, his movement is a classic example of the problem I mentioned earlier, of a high view of the Bible being ironically wedded to the conservative partisan tribe. To make matters even worse, it is nearly impossible for Christians in this movement to have self-awareness about their tribal commitments because the movement’s entire identity revolves around being “people of the Word” whose beliefs and actions flow directly out of the pages of the Bible—in contrast to Christians who compromise their faith with “worldly” ideas.
John MacArthur’s unfolding response to COVID-19 provides dramatic evidence. Like most churches in the US, Grace Community Church shut down in the spring as the pandemic exploded. In mid-April, he justified the move during a radio show:
QUESTION: “Do you believe it’s biblical when some pastors in America are continuing to hold services even though the government instructs them not to?”
[MacArthur]: If the government tells us to stop worshiping, stop preaching, stop communicating the gospel, we don’t stop. We obey God rather than men.
[…]
But this is not that. Might become that in the future. Might be overtones of that with some politicians. But this is the government saying, “Please do this for the protection of this society.” This is for greater societal good, that’s their objective. This is not the persecution of Christianity. This is saying, “Behave this way so that people don’t become ill and die.”
[…]
I mean, what should mark Christians is mercy, compassion, love, kindness, sacrifice. How are you doing that if you flaunt the fact that you’re going to meet; and essentially you’re saying, “We disregard the public safety issue.” You don’t really want to say that. That does not help the gospel cause.
When you’re told by an authority to do something and it’s for the greater good of the society physically, that’s what you do because that’s what Christians would do. We are not rebels and we’re not defiant, and we don’t flaunt our freedom at the expense of someone else’s health.
He repeated this reasoning a week later in an article entitled “Thinking Biblically About the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Interview with John MacArthur”, but added some comments that are suspiciously close to what conservative partisans were saying at that moment:
If we defy [the government prohibition on in-person services and if we say we’re going to meet anyway, we run the risk of exposing people to this illness needlessly. And why would we want to do that? Because this is a health issue, this is a health crisis. And since like any church, many of the people in our church are older. We wouldn’t want to expose them to that.
[…]
The government, we’ve learned one thing for sure in the government’s action: you don’t need an army to conquer a nation, all you need is fear. You don’t need an army, you don’t need a troop, you don’t need to fire a shot; just terrify people that they might die and they’ll all roll over in complete compliance. They’ll give up their freedoms, they’ll put on silly masks, they’ll put gloves on their hands, and they’ll sit in their house for as long as you tell them to sit there. You can conquer an entire nation in fear.
And by the way, last year the normal flu kill 80,000 Americans. That’s more than will die from this Coronavirus in America.
In these snippets, we see a tension between a desire to keep church members safe, and a deep concern about government overreach. (His derogatory comments about masks and his inaccurate prediction about the death toll are, as we’ll see, a premonition of things to come.)
Christ vs. Caesar?
Fast forward to July 2020. California, in response to a second surge of coronavirus cases, placed severe restrictions on religious gatherings, basically making it impossible for churches bigger than 100 people to gather indoors, even if congregants wore masks and socially distanced. I want to say very clearly: I think there is room for legitimate debate about whether measures like this are fair, or consistent with restrictions on other types of public gatherings.
As this Christianity Today article details, Grace Community Church (GCC) responded to California’s mandate in the most extreme possible way: by illegally reopening its church building to in-person services with no mandatory safety measures of any kind. Below is a picture of the first service, posted proudly to Twitter by one of MacArthur’s media directors:
This picture is nearly indistinguishable from any taken from before the pandemic. I count two masks in a crowd of perhaps a thousand (the average attendance of GCC is well over 3,000, between all services), and people are standing shoulder-to-shoulder.
Soon after, John MacArthur posted a widely-read article on his website, co-signed by GCC’s elders. The post, titled “Christ, not Caesar, Is Head of the Church,” is a stunning reversal of MacArthur’s words from April:
As His people, we are subject to His will and commands as revealed in Scripture. Therefore we cannot and will not acquiesce to a government-imposed moratorium on our weekly congregational worship or other regular corporate gatherings. Compliance would be disobedience to our Lord’s clear commands.
Following this paragraph is a strident argument that governments have no legitimate authority to suspend church services in any way, for any reason. It goes on to defend GCC’s decision to reopen services with no social distancing:
When officials restrict church attendance to a certain number, they attempt to impose a restriction that in principle makes it impossible for the saints to gather as the church. When officials prohibit singing in worship services, they attempt to impose a restriction that in principle makes it impossible for the people of God to obey the commands of Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16. When officials mandate distancing, they attempt to impose a restriction that in principle makes it impossible to experience the close communion between believers that is commanded in Romans 16:16, 1 Corinthians 16:20, 2 Corinthians 13:12, and 1 Thessalonians 5:26. In all those spheres, we must submit to our Lord.
Our prayer is that every faithful congregation will stand with us in obedience to our Lord as Christians have done through the centuries.
Much could be said about this response. For starters, it contradicts MacArthur’s own “biblical” advice in April on a variety of points. I’ll re-quote one section of the April article, because the contrast is so striking:
When you’re told by an authority to do something and it’s for the greater good of the society physically, that’s what you do because that’s what Christians would do. We are not rebels and we’re not defiant, and we don’t flaunt our freedom at the expense of someone else’s health.
In the July statement, gone is any visible attempt to balance safety and freedom. In its place is a sweeping, dramatic narrative of Christ vs. Caesar, of liberty vs. tyranny, with heroes on one side and villains on another (sound familiar?). MacArthur’s argument relies heavily on a concept in Reformed theology called “sphere sovereignty”, which delegates human authority to three “spheres” of society: the church, the family, and the government. MacArthur argues that the government has no authority to suspend in-person church services for any reason. He also contends that Christians are biblically required to meet in-person for church services. (Again, it’s hard to take these arguments seriously when MacArthur himself rebutted him three months ago, but if you want to read a more in-depth critique of these biblical arguments, I recommend this article by Jonathan Leeman, a theologically conservative Reformed Christian who shares many beliefs with MacArthur.)
The most notable aspect of the original statement, however, is the absence of a single word about coronavirus or the pandemic! If someone read this statement outside of the COVID-19 context, they might imagine a government shutting down church services for no reason other than disdain for Christian faith. One gets a strong impression that MacArthur and his elders simply don’t think the coronavirus pandemic is a serious health concern anymore, and that the government/media is manufacturing the continued crisis as a pretext for persecuting Christians. There is no attempt in the statement to explain or defend GCC’s decision to defy the counsel of every major health agency in the world by holding large indoor gatherings with virtually no masks or social distancing. (If anyone needs evidence of the danger of such a move, this CNN article is a good place to start.)
Jonathan Leeman picks up on the same problem:
What’s implied in MacArthur’s statement is that his elders don’t believe there is a real threat with Covid-19. […] And that judgement call presumably stands behind their subsequent judgment call to disobey the government.
Since MacArthur’s statement was first published, an addendum was added attempting to explain why GCC initially complied with government orders to suspend in-person services in April—something they now view as unbiblical. The addendum makes two arguments. First, it argues that churches can voluntarily comply with government suggestions to close, if there are good reasons to do so, but churches should resist government commands to close. It acknowledges that a public health crisis is a good reason for a church to close, but that COVID-19 no longer represents a serious public health crisis. Here are some key bits:
When the devastating lockdown began, it was supposed to be a short-term stopgap measure, with the goal to “flatten the curve”—meaning they wanted to slow the rate of infection to ensure that hospitals weren't overwhelmed. And there were horrific projections of death. In light of those factors, our pastors supported the measures by observing the guidelines that were issued for churches.
It is apparent that those original projections of death were wrong and the virus is nowhere near as dangerous as originally feared.
Twice, MacArthur makes mention of inaccurate death projections, as an attempt to justify a radical skepticism about the actual danger of the pandemic. What projections does he have in mind? (It’s worth noting that, with over 160k coronavirus deaths as of the writing of this post, MacArthur’s own projections in April were grossly inaccurate.) What does he mean by “nowhere near as dangerous as originally feared”? What data are he and his elders using to make this absolutely critical decision, which has the potential to harm countless congregants if they are wrong? Where are they getting this narrative? As an English professor might say, MacArthur needs to cite his sources.
There is only one plausible explanation for these contradictions, ommisions, and incoherencies: GCC’s decision is being guided primarily by allegiance not to Scripture but to the conservative partisan tribe. The rhetoric of the conservative partisan tribe is the only place where you can find a justification for a decision like this. It’s certainly not in Scripture. In fact, MacArthur’s dueling statements from April and July show an appalling willingness to re-interpret Bible passages about obeying public authorities, if the partisan playbook requires.
If you want further evidence, look at MacArthur’s interview with conservative partisan Tucker Carlson on Fox News, who fawned over his “courage”. Here are some excerpts from a summary of the interview, linked above:
Many of his attendees “didn’t buy the narrative,” he said. This past Sunday, there were 3,000 people gathered at Grace Community Church, where “they didn’t wear masks” because they “understand the reality of it.”
The pastor went on to argue his decision is “sensible” because there are approximately 40 million people living in California and just north of 8,700 residents have died with COVID-19 since the onset of the coronavirus pandemic.
I’ll paraphrase: the decision to re-open without masks or social distancing is “sensible” because the “narrative” of a dangerous pandemic is at odds with “reality”, as judged by MacArthur and his congregants.
MacArthur doubled down in a video statement published in early August:
In this video, he applauds the courage and piety of an elderly immunocompromised woman who is coming to in-person services at GCC (!). He also suggests that churches who continue to suspend in-person services do not understand what a “true church” is.
Just in the last 48 hours, a court has ruled that GCC can continue to hold in-person services, as long as they start wearing masks and social distancing at the services. MacArthur, apparently, has agreed to this stipulation. This development, already being hailed as a victory for religious liberty by conservative partisans, only underlines the problems I’ve laid out above. Why does it take a secular court to force a church to follow the most basic of safety measures during a pandemic? Why are they agreeing to follow these measures now, if they clearly didn’t believe in them before? Why couldn’t GCC just have petitioned the court first, if legal remedies were an option?
A Disaster for Christian Witness
There are no winners in this situation, but there are definitely a lot of losers. MacArthur has essentially given permission to countless Christians to obey or ignore public health precautions based entirely on their own appraisal of whether those precautions are necessary. He has blessed and sanctified a partisan narrative that holds, as its highest value, fear and disdain towards one’s perceived political and cultural enemies—not the values of Jesus. And, perhaps worst of all, he has presented this marriage of partisan tribalism and Christian faith as a vision of what “true” Christianity looks like, to the entire world.
The words of this article from The Davenant Institute, a group of Evangelical Reformed Protestants, put it best:
The past few months have not been kind to America or the American church. The coronavirus crisis, it has several times been observed, is surely a divine judgment—not necessarily a divine punishment (although God knows we have sins a-plenty), but a test that lays reality bare, that separates wheat from chaff, that throws into sharp relief the ugly fault-lines at the heart of our politics and churchmanship. And surely one thing this judgment has revealed is the astounding lack of judgment that characterizes so many of our leaders, the astounding absence of wisdom and prudence from our counsels.
(The full article, entitled “Christ and Caesar: A Response to John MacArthur,” is well worth reading, especially if you want to dive deeper into the biblical and theological problems with MacArthur’s July statement.)
What the church needs now—and she needs it urgently—is to ruthlessly examine whether we have been compromised by partisan tribalism, and repent of it. We desperately need to re-train ourselves the lost art of discernment, because if the MacArthur situation is any evidence, it is sorely lacking at this moment.
Thanks so much for reading this (rather long) email. Please reply to this email or leave a comment with any thoughts. I’d love to chat further about the issues raised here. And tell your friends to subscribe, so they can also get overly long emails about politics, culture, and Christian faith in their inboxes.
P.S. Here’s another great response to MacArthur from Gavin Ortlund, another Evangelical Reformed Christian leader.
P.P.S. My thoughts are my own, not my employer’s. If I said something stupid, it’s on me, not them.
When I think about the shifting stance of a leader like John McArthur a plate of spaghetti comes to mind. There are strands running in all kinds of directions. Some of the strands are bible verses - in come cases pulled out of context. Some strands are related to religious liberty and government tyranny - others to a premise of "church above all else". Yet they are all intertwined and convoluted, and then you throw the "sauce" of emotion, politics, and tribal agendas on top and now you can't even really trace any cogent arguments anymore.
I commend straighter, and more accurate (less driven by tribal agenda) paths. For example a church gathering is when two or three are gathered in Jesus name, right? Not just when the mega-churches gather to hear the celebrity pastor preach. And there is no real biblical/theological basis that physical distance to a Christian has anything to do with the practice of Christianity, or even the experience of fellowship. Granted it is nice for everyone, follower of Jesus or otherwise, to enjoy phyisical closeness, appropirate hugs, etc., but that is trumped (sorry for the possible political inference) by the command to love our neighbor/others. In a pandemic we love them by staying far enough away so that we will not spread germs.
This is a time when the chuch can show the world that it is not first and foremost an organization, but a MOVEMENT of followers, and not a gathering of people in a building, but an organic work of the Spirit. We can also show the world that the beauty of the church is that the presence of God is with the worshippers - even in a backyard - so no stress if we need to meet in our houses for now or long term. And both tribes are welcome.
Thank you for thinking this through and sending it out, Brad. Always good to reflect and repent when needed...a daily occurrence for me. I hear you on political tribalism...blech! The whole Coronavirus pandemic has got me thinking less about religious freedom vs. civic duty and more about God's higher ways. The LORD has clearly allowed this thing to rip across the globe and many are suffering. Let’s not waste our suffering but rather allow God to gouge out of our lives things that don’t belong there and yield to His Kingdom purposes. Could God’s purposes be for us to move away from large central church gatherings and toward smaller house churches? Not sure (I guess this is where the discernment comes in), but if this is what He wants, then I really want to get on board with HIS agenda.