The Supreme Court ruled late Friday that the California government cannot ban and prohibit indoor church services, giving a small victory to churches that have been defying the government and staying open, while also only being a half-measure that will continue to invite persecution.
Church-hating tyrant Governor Gavin Newsom’s office issued revised guidelines for indoor church gatherings services on Saturday. The new missives allow the people to gather but continued limiting attendance at 25% capacity. It also left in place restrictions on singing, chanting and social distancing, with fines in place for those who disobey.
Newson’s office stated that they will continue to enforce the ban on worship and capacity limits, citing that it is for the church’s own protection, with press secretary Daniel Lopez, saying in a statement:
We will continue to enforce the restrictions the Supreme Court left in place and, after reviewing the decision, we will issue revised guidelines for worship services to continue to protect the lives of Californians.
The court victory, which will benefit all churches, has largely been driven by Che Ahn of Harvest Rock Church in Pasadena CA, who has sustained criticism for almost a year while embroiled in on-going expensive litigation against the state in order to lift the ban. He was ebullient after the victory but said it’s not over yet.
While we have come under fire from some community members, we stand firm that the fruit of meeting in person lies in the spiritual, emotional and physical healing that worshipping the Lord Jesus Christ has brought to so many throughout the world.
Commenting on the awfulness of California blanket ban, Chief Justice John Roberts said of the case “that the maximum number of adherents who can safely worship in the most cavernous cathedral is zero—appears to reflect not expertise or discretion, but instead insufficient appreciation or consideration of the interests at stake.”
As far as the singing ban and still being in place, Justice Neil Gorsuch and Justice Clarence Thomas stated that they would have kept California from enforcing its singing ban, yet Justice Amy Coney Barrett disagreed, speaking on behalf of her and Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
She wrote that it wasn’t clear whether or not the prohibitions on singing were being applied “across the board” and that “if a chorister can sing in a Hollywood studio but not in her church, California’s regulations cannot be viewed as neutral.” While the ban could remain, for now, she said that the churches who sued ought to “submit new evidence to a lower court that the singing ban is not being applied generally.”
A CALL TO ACTION
Bringing you discernment news and commentary from a biblical, polemical perspective means it is tough out there on social media. We’re constantly getting kneecapped and constrained by tech companies who find our fidelity to the scripture and pursuit of truth to be intolerable, resulting in our reach being severely throttled.
For this reason, we ask you please consider supporting us a few different ways. The first, by liking and following our new Facebook page, our home where we share new posts and interact with our members. The second, by following and retweeting our Twitter page. The third, by signing up for our newsletter below.
And last, through direct support. You can catch our free weekly episodes of the Polemics Report by subscribing at BTWN. If you like what you hear and desire to hear more, you can get the VIP full-length version for only $5.95 per month on Patreon. Also, you get other freebies for additional monthly pledges.
Subscribe to us on Patreon here and support our ministry.
Stay informed. Subscribe Today.
When you subscribe, please add email@example.com to your contacts to ensure that your newsletter doesn’t go into your spam folder.
Enter your email address below…