Reflections on imprisoning a pastor in Canada
As of this writing James Coates, pastor of GraceLife Church in Spruce Grove, Alberta, has been released from prison without conditions. Pastor Coates spent 35 days in custody after officials said the church had violated public-health measures meant to help contain the spread of COVID-19. As things stand, he has one remaining charge pending, that of violating an Order of the Chief Medical Officer of Health by challenging the constitutionality of the public health order he is charged with violating. A court date for his constitutional challenge has been set for early May.
Coates’ release was likely moved forward after his incarceration provoked an international scandal that embarrassed the Alberta government. But more importantly, his release is a victory for all Canadians who value freedom and liberty, and who believe our Charter Rights are worth defending. All Canadians should be grateful, and it is a scandal that so many self-identified Canadian Christians have called him a troublemaker and poured scorn on his brave and costly stand.
Arguments will continue over whether Pastor Coates did the right thing by refusing to insist worshippers wear masks or limit their attendance per provincial health guidelines. But it seems to me that many of the arguments that have been put forward in favour of a servile obedience to the state are remarkably shallow and, in some cases irrelevant. It is nonsense to suggest, as one letter writer stated, that Pastor Coates advocates “a theocracy model of government where the church has the final say in governmental affairs.” All Pastor Coates has ever asked is that the government recognize the Charter Rights that protect his church’s freedom of religion, of peaceful assembly and association.
A friend of mine shared with me the contents of a letter he received in which the (anonymous) letter writer attacked Pastor Coates’ actions on several grounds. Like many Canadian Christians the writer seems to have absolutized Jesus’ statement in Matthew 5:39 to “not resist the one who is evil,” and Paul’s admonition in Romans 13:1 that “every person be subject to the government authorities.” By “absolutized,” I mean the approach some Christians take whereby they believe God has forbidden them to offer any resistance to those who would impose their wicked wills on others.
To illustrate, I was in the room when Canadian theologian and pacifist Ron Sider stated that if an evil man attacked his wife and children he would simply stand by and pray. Without doubt Christians are called to be peacemakers who turn the other cheek rather than escalate strife (Matthew 5:9), but Scripture also calls upon God’s people to “rescue those who are being taken away to death” (Proverbs 24:11) and warns in the next verse that God “watches over our souls” to see that we obey His admonition. Perhaps I am wrong to think this verse teaches Christians to be active in defending the weak, but if I am, then would someone please explain to me how evil men bent on evil purposes can be stopped by anything short of violence? If Christians are supposed to believe in the total depravity of man—and we are (Mark 7:21-23)—then we must also accept that some individuals give full license to their depravity and in their headlong rush to do evil will never respond to mere persuasion.
This readiness to trust God and do nothing has reached the point where my friend’s letter writer even questioned, “Do you see a theme in the Bible about [God] protecting our rights?” When I read that my immediate response was to think, “Why yes, yes I do!” In looking through the Bible I quickly found a number of examples to support the idea that God not only protects our rights, He also expects us to protect others’ rights, to the point of sometimes warning us that we are in danger of His wrath if we refuse to stand for the rights of others. Allow me to illustrate.
1) God defended Abel’s right to worship (Genesis 4:1-16). Now to be clear, both Abel and his brother Cain were religious, but Cain was religious on his own terms while Abel worshipped in a way that pleased God. Even today all men are religious, but as it was at the beginning of time, there are those whose worship pleases God, and there are those who worship to please themselves, and just as it was in the days of Cain and Abel, those who refuse to please God with their worship do all they can to stop or hinder the true worshippers.
Now, like then, God stands ready to curse those who harm His worshippers. In that light, I see it as a Christian act to remind modern tyrants, and proto-tyrants, that God still defends His people’s right to worship. Before moving to the next point, here is an exit question. Is it possible that before punishing tyrants God waits for His people to warn them of danger and call them to repent? Think about it. Without a warning, punishment might look like just another natural event. But with a warning, whatever happens, political or military defeat, sudden onset of disease, drought, famine, pandemic, etc., none of these can be relegated to mere happenstance.
2) God defends the right to life (Genesis 9:5-6). Remember, Genesis 9 is part of God’s great reset following the flood. Many things changed after that catastrophe, including the right to eat meat and the covenant promise that there would never be another worldwide flood. But another thing God said changed everything. He declared that if a man took another man’s life, He would “require a reckoning.” “Whoever sheds the blood of man,” God said, “by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image.” In this way, God made it clear that every human being is born with an inherent right to live, unless, of course, a man is proven to be a murderer. Thus, it is a supremely Christian act to defend every person’s right to life, from conception until natural death.
3) God defends conscience rights (Ex. 1:15-21). You will recall that to reduce the Hebrew population in Egypt the Pharaoh ordered the two Hebrew midwives, Shiphrah and Puah, to kill all the boy babies. Out of respect for the Abrahamic covenant they did not, and even lied to Pharaoh as to why they could not do it (They said the Hebrew women gave birth and hid their boy babies before they could get there). Notice how God rewarded them for defending the lives of these little ones. “And because the midwives feared God, he gave them families” (Ex. 1:21).
4) God defends the right to worship (Ex. 5:1ff). When reading Exodus, I fear too many of us rush ahead to get to the “good parts,” like the ten plagues and crossing the Red Sea. But notice what lead to the plagues: “Moses and Aaron went and said to Pharaoh, ‘Let my people go, that they may hold a feast to me in the wilderness’” (Ex. 5:1). In the same passage they further explained they intended to go a three-days’ journey into the wilderness to “sacrifice to the Lord our God, lest he fall upon us with pestilence or with the sword” (Ex. 5:3). Remember, just because our worship does not include sacrifices, we must never forget that sacrifices, followed by feasting, were primary aspects of Old Testament worship. Moses was asking, then, for his people’s freedom to worship the One True God. Pharaoh refused to let them go, as is well known, but what is not often recognized is that when the plagues fell upon the Egyptians, but not the Israelites, the king of Egypt could not help but realize that he had been warned not to defy Israel’s God.
5) God honours freedom of religion (Daniel 1:8-20). Some people are unaware of the difference between freedom of worship and freedom of religion, and thus might be tempted to think I already covered this in the previous paragraph. But the difference is huge. Many politicians are content to allow freedom of worship—as proven by their frequent public support for it—but they do all they can to diminish or eliminate freedom of religion. Why? Because worship is done either in private or in enclosed “sanctuaries” while religion impacts everything the believer does in life—their ethical life, how they vote, etc.
Daniel’s difficulty was that his Mosaic religion forbade him to eat the unclean foods served by the king. He solved his problem by figuring out the chief eunuch’s main concern (that if his charges ate only vegetables they would be judged sub-par by the king) and then demonstrate to him that such concerns were unfounded. But do not fail to notice that God helped Daniel because he insisted his religion included even what he ate. It seems to me that as Christians we, too, have a duty to live out our faith in public. Is it possible that God will openly stand with us if we stand out in our obedience to Him?
God defended freedom of religion at least twice more in Daniel, first when the Hebrew children, Shadrach, Meshack, and Abednego, accepted the furnace rather than bow to King Nebuchadnezzar’s golden idol (Daniel 3), and again when Daniel openly prayed to the God of heaven in direct defiance of King Darius’ edict (Daniel 6). Interestingly, neither king was left wondering how these men survived the furnace and the lion’s den. Why not? Because we find abundant evidence that Daniel had spent much time educating them as to the attributes and character of the One True God (see Dan. 2, 4, and 5). Thanks to their education, these kings were able to understand what happened when God protected His servants and punished the kings instead. We must not fail in our own duty to do the same for our modern rulers.
6) God blesses those who are unafraid to put themselves at risk in the battle to preserve the rights of His people (Esther 4:13-15). Through a unique set of circumstances, a Jewish girl became queen of the Persian empire. Her nationality and Jewish name (Hadassah) were kept secret, and she became queen under the Persian name Esther (Star). At about the same time Esther’s consort (King Xerxes) promoted a wicked man named Haman to a position of great power and authority, and from his new position he plotted to kill all the Jews in the world. All this happened, by the way, about 100 years after the life of Daniel. By this time many Jews had returned to Jerusalem and were busily rebuilding the temple and city wall. But Esther, along with her family and many other Hebrews, were still living in Persia as “strangers in a strange land” (Ex. 2:22, KJV).
When Esther’s Uncle Mordecai learned of Haman’s plot to kill the Jews, he could not speak to Esther because she was shut up in the palace. Instead, he drew attention to himself by dressing in sackcloth and crying out in the city centre. Esther heard what he was doing and sent a servant to find out what was wrong. Mordecai explained everything and asked her to go the king and “plead with him on behalf of her people” (Esther 4:9). But she begged off, saying she could be put to death if she entered the king’s presence without an invitation. Her hesitancy prompted a prophetic word from Mordecai.
Do not think to yourself that in the king's palace you will escape any more than all the other Jews. For if you keep silent at this time, relief and deliverance will rise for the Jews from another place, but you and your father's house will perish. And who knows whether you have not come to the kingdom for such a time as this? (Esther 4:13-14)
Esther heeded her uncle’s warning and resolved to trust God and go to the king (“If I perish, I perish,” were her last words (Esther 4:16). Notice Mordecai’s confidence that God would protect his people one way or another. But also notice Mordecai’s warning to Esther. If she refused to stand for God’s people, she would not merely miss a blessing, she and her father’s house would be cursed. God help us not to fail when it is our time to risk everything (See Esther 4:16).
7) In the early days of the church God approved the church’s readiness to defy governmental authorities (Acts 4:1-31). In Acts 3 Peter and John were used by the Holy Spirit to heal a lame man at the temple gate. A crowd gathered and Peter used the opportunity to proclaim Jesus as the man’s healer and Saviour, and to call the people of Jerusalem once again to repentance and faith. That is when the High Priest sent armed men to arrest Peter and John. The next day the High Priest and his associates put the two apostles on trial.
Remember, in those days the High Priest and his council combined the sacred and the secular, meaning the apostles were before a tribunal that combined elements of all levels of Canada’s provincial and federal court systems. For a Jew this was the highest court in the land, beyond which there was no appeal. If an absolutist view of Romans 13 applies anywhere, it should certainly apply here. The court commanded them “not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus,” to which Peter and John replied, “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge, for we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard” (Acts 4:19-20).
Now some may argue that no Canadian government has ever commanded pastors or laymen “not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus.” And while it is true that those precise words have probably never come out of a government official’s mouth, it is equally true that governments have treated churches much more harshly during this year-long shut-down than, say, grocery stores and big box stores like Walmart and Costco. Churches have been forced to stream their services or else keep the size of the congregation to 15% of capacity, and when some churches have tried to meet in cars in their parking lots they have been harassed by police and health officials. It seems to me that anyone with an ounce of discernment should be able to see that Canada’s governments have put their knees on the necks of the nation’s churches, and they are apparently prepared to keep them there for as long as possible. The churches are not dead, but many are dying.
Now watch what Peter and John did. When they were released, they went back to the church and reported what they had been told, at which point the church immediately turned to prayer, and asked God for boldness to keep on doing the things that had gotten Peter and John into trouble in the first place. Did God approve of their prayer? Apparently, He did. How else would you interpret Acts 4:31? “And when they had prayed, the place in which they were gathered together was shaken, and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and continued to speak the word of God with boldness.”
8) God approved Deacon Stephen’s inflammatory attacks on Jewish leadership (Acts 7:54-60).
You stiff-necked people, uncircumcised in heart and ears, you always resist the Holy Spirit. As your fathers did, so do you. Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? And they killed those who announced beforehand the coming of the Righteous One, whom you have now betrayed and murdered, you who received the law as delivered by angels and did not keep it. (Acts 7:51-53)
Not surprisingly, the same Jewish court that commanded Peter and John not to preach about Jesus became enraged at Stephen’s words. But Stephen tipped them into insanity when he said, “Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man (Jesus) standing at the right hand of God” (Acts 7:56). That is when they went from rage to murderous rage and stoned Stephen to death.
Is it too much to assume that when people like Stephen stand up for Jesus, He will stand up for them? Is it possible our Lord does not stand up for us Canadian Christians because we are too embarrassed, or too weak to stand up for Him? Does anyone doubt that Stephen died as a Christian and that the actions that led to his death were also deeply Christian? It seems to me that the one thing we modern Christians lack is the readiness to throw caution to the wind, to declare the truth plainly, and to trust God for the outcome, saying with Esther and the host of heroes who followed her, “If I perish, I perish.”