Author: Uri Brito

If this pandemic were a novel, it would be too predictable. We would probably know very early on the ending. It begins with a great force insisting that they know better for us. To compel us further, they would align their brightest wise-men and tell the populace that their compelling charts are inerrant. They might as well have descended from above. This force would then assert that they know better and that they would protect our best interest by locking us up. But to make things a bit more tolerable they would “allow” us to quickly gather our essentials in a nearby food repository. “Trust us,” they say. And trust them we did.

The reader would quickly see the plot unfold as little by little the gaps in the curtain would give us an uncomfortable sense that things are not as they should be. The person pulling the strings is led by a host of wormtongues eager to ensure the utmost power for that greater force.

Again, the reader can see the end of the story. He knows that when a greater force seeks the comprehensive well-being of a people there will never be a back to normal scene as the story unfolds. The greater force doesn’t then return to business as usual, but business as granted. It seeks greater power.

Instead of keeping that force at bay, in the name of security, we forsook our right to labor and life. We should remember as the story continues that ancient prophet, Francis Schaeffer, who opined that we must speak out against authoritarian governments or we and our children will eventually be the enemy of society and state.

It’s time now to see the ending for what it is, o reader! Security does not trump our liberty to be the people we were called to be. It’s time for courage in the public square and–cautiously–resume our roles in the story and see to it that the ending is altered. The ending may seem clear, but the story has not yet been written. We serve a greater king who overwrites even the obvious human stories.

My professor once told me that his wife was diagnosed with a rare disease. The first doctor strongly encouraged a very intrusive surgery that could have dangerous consequences. My professor decided to get a second opinion from another doctor who specialized in the same field. His assessment was less dire. He encouraged a less intrusive procedure coupled with medication and nutritional changes. The second expert was right. His wife made a full recovery and today lives a pain-free life.

What we are experiencing in our day is a battle in the arena of expertise. As society begins to re-open, we are now aware that experts promoting an apocalyptic agenda for the country severely overestimated the impact of the virus in our lives. As a result, the economic and psychological damage will be devastating. And, as I wrote elsewhere, the most important and underestimated damage is the spiritual damage on millions of Christians absent from the reality of word and sacrament and real worship.

In a society that makes an icon of individualism, expertise is dead. Long live the self! We are an insubordinate culture. We take the fifth commandment with little seriousness and the authorities in our lives are often treated like options in a buffet line.

But with the politicization of expertise, where does the truth lie? It does not reside in individualism. And it does not reside in one-size fits all authority figures in any field. In virtually every domain, there will be experts who take new findings and revise their own conclusions. But this is a rare thing. The more common occurrence is that experts take the facts and make them fit into their agenda. We can conclude, therefore, that there is idolatry on both sides the spectrum. We worship at the feet of insubordination or at the feet of a expert.

The truth is a person. Truth is Jesus because everything that proceeds from his mouth is from Yahweh. In most cases, our failures stem from basic denials of our Lord’s authority to speak into our lives. But the more complex denials on issues regarding the science of COVID-19 or other spheres stem from another basic factor. Jesus did not function as a lonely Messiah. He surrounded himself with a company of friends.

The lesson is that truth ought to change us as we live together. It is not wrong to change your opinion based on facts. It is wrong to determine that your opinion will never change regardless of facts or alternative expertise. Human nature dictates through this season that if we assumed COVID-19 is too risky and dangerous to the point that any return to normalcy is foolish, then you will find yourself at the feet of one lineage of experts. The same is true if you think this entire thing is just like the ordinary flu. We go too far in one direction without consulting our circle of friends or getting a second opinion.

In the end, our call is to seek wisdom from a localized community while acknowledging that we have presuppositions about the entire scheme before expert voices rise. If our presuppositions are wrong, long live truth. We are all political creatures which means experts are political creatures also. Our call is to return to the relative consensus of our small communities (churches/families). We may be wrong at times, but we will share a mutual respect for particular authorities in our lives without making an idol of our individual knowledge or placing our entire lives at the hands of an expert in a land far away.

I certainly don’t want to see the death of expertise. I want brilliant experts in every field who dedicate thousands of hours to studying one issue with great precision. I want my ears open at the end of the day to their data. But to assume that one expert has all the answers is perhaps where many of us have gone wrong. If anything, I am calling for a return to localized expertise whose knowledge is easily knowable and whose agenda has my holistic well-being in mind. If a doctor stresses that only the worst scenario is the best alternative for my spouse, you better believe I am going to find another trustworthy expert to see if the conclusion of the first expert is truly the only alternative. Give ear to experts, but test the experts. No expert is above reproach.

Assuming there is a legitimate place for some form of government aid in times of crisis (and notable theologians like John Frame and others agree with this), there is a fundamental temporariness to it as well.

For the Dutch theologian, Abraham Kuyper, we should resist the excessive aid of government to allow the natural spheres of families and religious bodies to exert their function in society. As the American experiment has proven, the intervention of the state in the economic affairs of its people in dire times leads to an increased need for such intervention in simpler times. When that happens, the Church and the household (oikos) fail to exercise their rightful role in restoring the needy to an environment where flourishing is possible.

The current pandemic serves as an illustration that many in the government sphere are seeking to use these times as the means to implement their vision. There is no neutrality even in these strange times. Facts are not brute. They are interpreted by deeply held views of the world. For those who are eager to see the government usurp their authority over other spheres, this is the opportune time. As de Blasio said, “We need the federal government to make us whole before we restart.” This religious expression is a clear indication of the sacramental imprint certain politicians wish to see applied on the country as a whole.

When such philosophies prosper, Kuyper’s sphere sovereignty becomes unbalanced and the government is free to interfere in the affairs of church and house. One Harvard apologists recently sought to cast doubt on the practice of homeschooling. By simply posing the question of whether homeschooling is risky, such apologists are seeking to raise national skepticism over the function of biological families to educate their own tribe as they see fit. “Did God really say it is the fundamental duty of parents to train their children in the nurture and admonition of his Name?”

While there is a limited and temporary role for the federal government to exercise, such role must not trespass its boundary. We begin to lose that battle when such questions are allowed to be raised without dispute. If we allow it, we are irresponsible citizens and the sovereignty of spheres is quickly violated. If, however, we continue to stress the necessity of charitable bodies to operate as ordinary distributors for the well-being of peoples, we will have at least a chance of avoiding the inherent intrusionary nature of the state.

I have been overjoyed with the response to the tune I wrote for this old Easter hymn. The arrangement is made by the talented Jonathan Franzone. The musical score will be made available to the public in the next few days. Here is a recording of it from the Parry family: