These Precedented Times: Lessons from the Church's response to the Spanish Flu in 1918.

 

We tend to make the assumption that our current moment is completely unprecedented. I mean, how many times have we recently heard or used the phrase, "We're living in unprecedented times!"  The more I read though, the more I begin to question that assumption. I believe there is actually a precedent for these times. Of course, the unique blend of pandemic, social upheaval and economic downturn does make our times particularly intense and challenging. One commentator said that we are living through a combination of the 1918 Spanish Flu, the 1929  Great Depression and the 1960's Social Revolution. But if we listen closely to history, we will find some very helpful precedents for these times. They are not identical, but they are similar enough to provide helpful warnings and encouragements to us. 

The British poet, Steve Turner once wrote, "History repeats itself. It has to. We never listen." Now is our time to listen to the precedent of history, so that we do not repeat it. Now is also the time to take courage from history.

 

This article is the result of some research on precedents in pandemics by my friend and colleague, Kristine Nethers, a history teacher with her Masters degree from Stanford University. We asked Kristine to do some research on cultural and historic trends around pandemics. This is a teaser for her larger research project which is an outstanding piece of work. While the scope of her study begins broad, it narrows in to the Church's response to pandemics and scattering. This is a fascinating excerpt, used with her permission.

                                     ----------------------------------------------------------

There are stark similarities between the Church's response to the “Spanish Flu”  in 1918 and the Covid-19 crisis of today as detailed below. It is estimated that 50 million people died world-wide from the Spanish Flu, with approximately 675 000 of those deaths being in the USA. 

12 Historic Church Responses to the “Spanish Flu” of 1918-1919 (USA)

1. (Most) churches shut down. 

As state and local governments began to comprehend the scope of the crisis in their jurisdictions, they called for churches to shut down (along with schools, theaters, etc.). Some churches remained opened in defiance of local orders. Research suggests that most churches were shut from early Oct. 1918 to early December 1918, while some cities had bans on public gatherings until January 1919. The research is unclear about how churches dealt with the second wave. 

2. Churches quickly improvised with “home worship.” 

Churches provided sermon notes and hymn notes and worship materials during the shutdown. Some local newspapers printed sermons in their local editions. Pastors provided theological framework for this time as extended Sabbath and a way to disciple one’s family. 

3. New technology was quickly utilized to connect safely. 

Telephones were the Zoom of the day! Homebound people used the phone to greater degrees to connect during the shutdowns at the end of 1918. Home phones were becoming more popular in the 1910s, but the infrastructure was limited so cities urged citizens to limit their telephone use to emergency only as to not overload the system. 

4. Church leaders called an end to the ban on church gatherings and defended the church’s role in promoting the well-being of the community.

There are several examples of church leaders calling for an end to government bans on gathering beginning three weeks after bans were put in place. A Catholic clergyman in Baltimore pleaded on the vital role that churches play in the community by saying, “I am told that a number of calls upon our physicians are simply the result of nervousness, or the consequence of alarm. This might be considerably allayed by the reassurance of religion, and discreet words from our priests given the people in church.” 

5.  Services were amended for greater safety.

 A Catholic Bishop in Detroit stated they would be “willing to have their edifices fumigated between meetings, to cut the services to 45 minutes, to employ special ushers, who would eject persons who coughed or sneezed and to require all worshipers entering a church to wear influenza masks” if their city allowed them to reopen.  

6. Some argued that banning of church gatherings was a violation of the First Amendment. 

Many church leaders went to court to argue that the First Amendment right to ‘peacefully assemble’ was violated. Research suggests that courts by-in-large upheld the government’s right to ban public gatherings for health reasons to reasonably enforce those bans . 

7. End times were predicted.

 

Church leaders were predicting that the pandemic would usher in Jesus’ return  with numerous Doomsday theories.

8. Tithes & offerings went down. 

Appeals to continue giving and to resource a benevolence fund were called for.

Church leaders appealed to their congregations for giving and sought to help those who had been affected financially. The Southern Baptist denomination called for a “A 75 Million Campaign” in response to the pandemic. While they fell short of that goal, their combined giving towards missions was 10 times higher than it previously been in any previous year. 

9. Outdoor services were held as a response to government bans.

Some churches pivoted quickly to outdoor services, some to the ire of local authorities. 

10. Church leaders were divided about reopening and “grumbling” was common. 

Not all church leaders and churchgoers were in the same accord about church re-openings and “grumblings” among Christians ensued.  

11. God’s protection of people against the disease was called into question. 

One D.C. pastor provided this response, “The fact that the churches were places of religious gathering, and the others not, would not affect in the least the health question involved. If avoiding crowds lessens the danger of being infected, it was wise to take the precaution and not needlessly run in danger, and expect God to protect us.” 

12. Pastors were extra busy. 

A Milwaukee, Wisconsin newspaper reported that church closures did not “leave the city’s ‘pastors with any surplus of leisure on their hands.’ With the faithful encouraged to engage in ‘home worship’ and read sermons published in newspapers, Protestant and Catholic clergy were instead devoting more of their energy to pastoral care and sick calls.” 

 Used with permission  Kristine Nethers  © Manna Publishing 

     

                                         ------------------------------------------------

Does any of this ring a bell?! There are so many stark similarities between their pandemic and ours.

So, what can we learn from the Church's response to the Spanish Flu? 

1. First, a pandemic is an opportunity for innovation and we must seize it instead of resenting it. Whether  new modes of communication, new forms and precautions for gathering, or new ways of expressing care, the church must be faithful with it's message but flexible with its methods. In fact, while the pastoral cohesion becomes more difficult in the scattering of pandemic, gospel innovation can result in the advance of the gospel into new frontiers. Church members should adapt and commit to the new innovations instead of using the change as an excuse to drop out of regular fellowship.

2. Grumbling at God, each other and our leaders is a besetting sin of God's people in crisis, and we must beware of it. History teaches us humility and gratitude. We are not in a completely unique or unresolvable situation.  God’s people have experienced these times before, God has got them through it and He will get us through too. Be gracious to your pastors who are in the busiest and most highly criticized season of their ministry lives. 

3. We should beware of jumping to Doomsday conclusions, especially simplistic end-time or conspiracy theories. Too many folk have profited off fear-mongering and Christians' gullibility at times like this, and while the Church must live in anticipation of Christ's return, we will lose our witness if we become fixated with how and when that return will take place. 

4. Be slow to politicize pandemics.

Of course,  convictions around government infringement on freedom of worship run especially deep, and these are valid. But when these convictions cause Christians to disregard the reality of a pandemic, or become cavalier with safety precautions, we put other people in danger and damage our witness. The exercise of civil disobedience should be a last resort, not a first reaction,  and a willingness to lay down our freedoms temporarily out of love for our neighbors may very well be better in the long term for our gospel witness. 

5. This too shall pass! 

These times are not completely unprecedented and they are not permanent. Of course, there is likely to be a new normal after pandemic, but let's not overstate that by saying, everything is going to spiral down into an apocalypse! Remember, the Roaring 20's followed a year after the Spanish Flu which  was a surge of economic prosperity, positivity and culture.  Humans are remarkably resilient and adaptable, and God is faithful.  As the writer of Ecclesiastes wrote, "There is nothing new under the sun." God brought His people through the Spanish Flu and He will bring us through COVID-19. 

(My next blog will be about learning from the Church in Antioch after the Diaspora)

Reverence: the missing piece in our worship.

A few of our Southlands musicians were delighted to sing group vocals on Matt Redman's recent album, Glory Song. Singing some of those songs live a few months later with him and his band as a church at our Night of Grace was a longing fulfilled for me. Over the years, I've marveled at how God seems to have given Matt the gift of expressing His heart for the Church at a particular moment with such poignance. There is one such moment on his album that comes after a song called Simple Pursuit, where he breaks into a probing spontaneous song that asks, "Did we lose the awe of God? Where has all the reverence gone? There's a song of Majesty we've forgotten how to sing. Bring us back to your Glory Song."

In the Western church, at any rate, we've never had such an embarrassment of riches when it comes to musical worship resources. Great songs abound on countless albums. Musicians are more skillful than ever. Arrangements, instruments, acoustics, lighting, graphics, sound rigs and musicians are cooler than ever.  There's a wonderful mix of intimate songs and majestic hymnology, stripped down folksy meditations and catchy, wall-of-sound anthems. With a few notable exceptions, there's an increasing lyrical depth  and a creative diversity.  I'm no worship curmudgeon, nostalgic for the good old days when we only had our hymn books, Vineyard, Integrity and Maranatha to choose from. (Respect to them all). I remember the old days. Believe me, they weren't that good! But I think Matt's song touches a raw nerve that causes me to flinch a little, probing at something I intuitively feel may now be missing. 

Reverence. 

Where has all the reverence gone? Perhaps it's been replaced by cool? Worship today seems fixated with cultural relevance. I, for one, am glad we've shrugged off some of the cultural cringe factor of being 10 years behind the times in musical style. But relevance   is a poor substitute for reverence. The former reaches outwards to our world in a language that is intelligible. It's  timely. The latter reaches  inwards to the holy realm of God's eternal throne. It's timeless. Reverence will never be satisfied with being merely timely.

Reverence is the unsandaled feet of Moses standing in the smoldering sand before the burning bush. It is, by its very nature, both intimate and awe-filled. "Since we are receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken let us be thankful and so worship God acceptably with reverence and awe, for our God is a consuming fire." (Hebrews  12: 28)  

Reverence does not cower in fear. The blood of Christ speaks a better word than the blood of Abel. It bids us come to glorious Mount Zion, not the fire and smoke of Mount Sinai. But it stands there wide-eyed, hand over it's mouth without so much as a hint of blasé'.   

Reverent worship is the farthest thing from consumer worship. It does not do song-tasting. It understands that we bring a sacrifice that God consumes. It looks less like a song offered up and more like a life laid down. It will repent quickly. Obey fully. It's songs will be the soundtrack to a life of justice and mercy.

I would venture to say that reverent worship sounds less like something on a stage and more like something among a people. I would not think that reverent worship is only about singing old hymns and doing liturgy. But I think that reverent worship will be open to historic expressions of worship beyond the tyranny of our own moment. It may be loud one moment, quiet the next, but never luke-warm.

Reverent worship is in Spirit and Truth, anchored by the ballast of God's Word but with sails hoisted to catch the Wind that blows wherever it pleases. 

Did we lose the awe of God? Lord, Bring us back to reverence. 

  

'Grant us a little Reviving' : A Prayer for Revival that doesn't Freak me out.

I once took part in a week long fast during which people prayed day and night for revival up in the mountain kingdom of Lesotho. All I can remember of the time was feeling really hungry and a little freaked out. Because of that, the idea of praying for revival conjures up images of many loud prayers and many loud preachers, waving big black bibles and making big promises in a dusty tent, and a hollow sense of anti-climax, because nothing really happened. Because of those memories, I generally steer clear of praying for revival for fear of hyping people into a kind of  expectation that inevitably ends in jadedness.

I'm nervous of an overly Pentecostal approach to prayer that expects God to change everything in one sudden, cataclysmic moment. Truth be told, I've found much of the life of prayer is about inheriting the promises of God little by little through faith and patience.  However, I'm equally nervous of the more popular Contemplative approach to prayer that insists all change must be slow and gradual. Biblically and in Church history, we have to acknowledge that there were times when God did in fact come and dramatically change everything for His people in an instant. These times were described as Revivals, and God wants us to persist in praying for a suddenly;  a dramatic in-breaking of His power and mercy, even while we labor in the slowlies. God is the God of slowlies and suddenlies.

Today in the book of Ezra, I found a prayer for revival I can pray without nervousness. It is so beautifully understated. Twice, Ezra uses the phrase, "Grant us a little reviving." He is not asking for God to come down and build the temple all by Himself. There is not an ounce of abdication in Ezra's prayer.  It is prayed before Israel return from exile to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem and they know that it will not be done over-night. So they are asking to be revived so that they can re-build. 

Ezra prayed that God would revive His people by satisfaction, for mission and for re-building.  

1.  Revived by Satisfaction 'That our God may brighten our eyes and grant us a little reviving in our slavery" 9:8  This  request comes off the back of Israel's repentance from idolatry. It is a prayer for personal revival. When Saul's son Jonathan ate from honeycomb after battle in 1 Samuel 14, he said, "See how my eyes brightened when I tasted a little of that honey." Ezra borrows from this idea, praying that Israel would not only be cleansed from their sin, but that they would turn to God and be revived by Him as they feast on the honey of His goodness. Revival begins as God's people are broken out of  slavery to sin and find satisfaction in Jesus.  

2.  Revived for Mission 'Our God has not forsaken us in our slavery, but has extended to us his steadfast love before the kings of Persia.' v 9 Can we see how God is taking His people's eyes off their own slavery and has started to set it on doing a work in their city? This is a key in revival, where our satisfaction in Jesus turns to a desire for transformation in our cities.  This desire was met with  favor from 'the kings of Persia.' Note that favor with those in authority does not mean we automatically get a Christian government. The Babylonian empire did not become Jewish, but their king looked favorably upon the Jewish exiles and granted them finance and permission to carry out their mission. This is something we can be praying for the Church, not necessarily that we would be in positions of power, but that we would experience favor with authorities rather than persecution.  "Pray for those in authority that we may have  live quiet and godly lives. This is pleasing to God who wants all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." (1 Tim 2:3-4)   It could be argued that revival begins when the Church is free to get on with the job of being the Church, proclaiming and demonstrating the gospel in all sectors of society, re-building the city's ruins. This includes a harvest of salvation, the upholding of godly values throughout society, and a rise of mercy and justice in the face of corruption and oppression. 

3. Revived for Re-building "Grant us some reviving to set up the house of God and to repair it's ruins."

The returning exiles not only re-built the city walls, they also rebuilt the temple; the house of God. This parallels God's purpose for His Church to be restored to a place of His glory. A glorious church experiences a restoration of robust gospel proclamation and a demonstration of the Spirit's power that results in a harvest. Worship is restored to reverent passion and community becomes authentic, sacrificial and bold. Revival must include a revival of the builders of the church.  Let's ask that God would energize us to be builders.    

This prayer is so faith-filled, yet so responsible. No freak show here. Just an earnest plea for revival.
Let's pray it together. 

Trump and our Evangelical strangeness: an opinion piece.

A recent poll in Reuters  showed that Evangelicals who go to church don't like Trump. This statement seems strange to me for two reasons.  It seems strange that any Evangelicals support the billionaire turned presidential candidate hopeful, although it's somewhat of a relief that Evangelicals who actually go to church do not generally like him. While his conviction and clarity may seem Messianic, his power-hungry, playground-bully tactics and blustering ego are more more akin to Herod than Jesus. As Christians, we cannot look to any political leader as our Messiah, but if we are going to vote for someone, surely they should possess something of the essence of our Messiah?

Anyway, what's even more strange to me than Evangelicals supporting Trump is that Reuters actually have a category for Evangelicals who go to church. 

As if there were any other category of Evangelical?

But of course, we know there must be another category and it would be  made up of those who identify as Evangelicals who do not go to church. This is indeed strange, but we know it to be true.
We know that there are many Evangelicals who do not go to church. I'm not talking about nominal or sporadic church going. I'm not even talking about less formal expressions of church.  I'm talking about a convicted refusal to gather with the people of God to worship Jesus, hear the preaching of the Scriptures, pray and celebrate the sacraments in any organized way, shape or form. Being Evangelical and refusing to go to church is more strange to me than being Evangelical and liking Trump.

An Evangelical, at its most basic, is a Christian who views the Bible as God's final of authority for all life and doctrine. Just flip through the pages of the New Testament and you will see that a Christ follower who doesn't go to church is simply not a thing. To deny the authority of the Bible on the subject of the Church generally, one must cut out half of the New Testament which was written to and about the church. Perhaps at this stage, with bible-snipping scissors in hand, one should also snip off one's Evangelical label?

I grew up in a moralistic Christian culture. People thought that if they did the right things like going to church then they were Christians. They would check the boxes. "Helped a poor person. check. Read my bible. check. Said my prayers. check.  Went to church. check.  I'm a Christian." To counter this moralism we would say, "Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than living in a garage makes you a car." We were trying to help people see that we are saved by God's  grace not by our religious activity. Today we no longer live in a moralistic Christian culture. It's individualistic. The car/garage  metaphor has been turned on its head. It's like people are saying, "Just because I'm a car doesn't mean I have to park it in a garage." Evangelicals  may view going to church today as optional, but not vital. It's no longer simply what we are designed to do. It's now a matter of preference.  To continue the car/garage metaphor I'd respond, "Of course you could be a car and not park in a garage. But then don't be surprised if you find your car getting dirty, faded or even stolen."

Don't be surprised if you find yourself voting for Herod instead of Jesus.

One of the arguments against going to church is, "We don't go to church. We are the Church."
This is quite true. Since the day that we were adopted as sons and daughters into God's worldwide family,  we were made members of that family and remain members every moment of our days.
 But if I was a member of a family who refused to gather regularly with that family you would say that I was a very unhealthy family member. Of course, there is plenty of dysfunction in God's family. It's far from perfect. But it's the Father's profound gift to us as His children and as we engage with a healthy church family we discover new depths of the Father's love that were simply unfathomable when we lived in splendid isolation.

No doubt, we don't just go to church. We are the Church. 
But if we are the Church, we also go to church.