Gov't Finally Takes Over, Arrests Pastor for Holding Church Service in Violation of COVID Rules
New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio’s never a particularly popular man among the conservative set, but there’s a line between progressivism and Constitution-baiting. De Blasio crossed it and then some, saying that not only would places of worship face fines but could be shuttered for good.
At a Friday news conference, de Blasio said that if churches don’t respond to fines, authorities “will take additional action up to the point of fines and potentially closing the building permanently.”
“No faith tradition endorses anything that endangers the members of that faith. So, the NYPD, Fire Department, Buildings Department, everyone has been instructed that if they see worship services going on, they will go to the officials of that congregation, they’ll inform them they need to stop the services and disperse,” he said.
That’s basically nothing short of a guy standing outside the First Amendment’s house, drunkenly yelling at it to come out so they can fight. I’ve seen these fights before and the drunk guy usually loses.
Surprisingly, it wasn’t de Blasio’s New York that ended up being the first to arrest a pastor for holding church services. That honor (probably not the right word) goes to Hillsborough County, Florida, Sheriff Chad Chronister, who decided he had no choice but to arrest the head of a Tampa church that was continuing to worship.
#Breaking: @HCSOSheriff issues arrest warrants for Pastor Rodney Howard-Browne after, despite warnings, the River at Tampa Bay Church defiantly held two religious services Sunday in defiance of Hillsborough County‘s “safer at home“ order. pic.twitter.com/vG9s6I84Kc
— Eric Glasser WTSP (@EricGlasserWTSP) March 30, 2020
According to NBC News, Rodney Howard-Browne, head of the River at Tampa Bay Church was arrested on Monday by sheriff’s deputies after a Sunday service.
“Last night I made the decision to seek an arrest warrant for the pastor of a local church who intentionally and repeatedly chose to disregard the orders set in place by our president, our governor, the CDC and the Hillsborough County Emergency Policy Group,” Chronister said Monday.
“His reckless disregard for human life put hundreds of people from his congregation at risk and thousands of residents who may interact with them this week in danger.”
Chronister said authorities had been in contact with the church and told it not to hold in-person services, but goshdarnit, the church just refused to listen.
“Dr. Ronald Howard-Browne refused requests to temporarily stop holding large gatherings at his church and instead he was encouraging his large congregation to meet at his church,” Chronister said, according to NBC.
“Pastor Howard-Browne’s actions were a direct violation of Executive Order 20-5, which went into effect on March 20, limiting gatherings — including faith-based gatherings — to less than 10 people.”
Chronister was apparently misinformed about the efficacy of dealing with a sensitive situation by spouting hyperadministrative gobbledygook. What part of Executive Order 20-5 did you not understand, Dr. Howard-Browne?
(For the record, Chronister is a Republican — like most sheriffs in Florida — but told The Tampa Bay Times in a profile published in October that he’s “the most Democratic of Republicans.”)
A video of the service shows a church that wasn’t packed but worshippers closer together than six feet of distancing between congregants, NBC reported. In a statement, Mat Staver, a lawyer for the church, said it was practicing social distancing and providing safety items like hand sanitizer, according to NBC.
“They’re trying to beat me up, you know, having the church operational,” Howard-Browne told the congregation on Sunday, according to NBC. “But we are not a nonessential service.”
He also said that worshippers shouldn’t talk to outsiders about the services.
“My encouragement to you is not to talk to these people because they’re not looking for the truth,” he said, according to NBC. “They’re just trying to find an angle to shut the church down.”
Now, was going ahead with a large service that gathered hundreds of people together a smart decision in the face of the coronavirus threat? No, in italics. Was arresting the head of the church for holding services smart? No, and it wasn’t constitutional, either.
The idea that constitutionally protected activities — particularly the freedom to worship — are subject to the whims of government, even in an emergency, is a dubious one. It hasn’t been challenged in court because most people agree with social distancing.
However, most states allow for essential services to remain open. In New Jersey, for instance, the executive order clamping down on movement allowed liquor stores and print shops to remain open. If you can get booze and get fliers printed, you should also be able to go to church, particularly when you consider the explicit constitutional protections for religion.
“The problem with this administrative order is it was not reviewed by constitutional experts or vetted by a deliberative body,” Staver said in the statement.
Shutting down the ability to worship freely hasn’t been tested yet — and, according to constitutional law professor and author KrisAnne Hall, it’s not a right the government can suspend.
“These laws try to justify unequal application based upon the definition of essential services. By what authority does the government declare the church nonessential?” Hall wrote in an Op-Ed for The Western Journal published Sunday.
“The Church is a place where people turn for help and for comfort in a climate of fear and uncertainty. In a time of crisis, people are fearful and in need of comfort and community, more than ever before. Even people who do not attend church regularly, or perhaps never go to church, need to know that there is somewhere for them to go when they need help …
“There is nothing in the law or precedent to establish a blanket and arbitrary assertion of ‘state of emergency’ as an unquestionable authority,” she continued. “There is also nothing in the law or precedent to support a restriction on the number of people who can assemble in a church, for health reasons or otherwise, as a criterion for denying the essential right of freedom of religion.”
The issue is there’s really no precedent for the current situation, of course. It’s curious that authorities would decide to test the waters on this. If there’s anything that’s bound to raise certain Americans’ hackles, it’s taking away their constitutional rights in a focused manner.
Before you rouse me on Twitter with a vulgar hashtag, I’d just like to make something clear: I. Do. Not. Endorse. This. The ability to do something constitutionally protected and actually doing it are two different things. Rodney Howard-Browne is hardly the smartest pastor that I’ve come across and the congregants at the River at Tampa Bay Church probably ought to check themselves before they wreck themselves.
Then again, there’s also a danger to shoppers putting their grimy mitts all over Walmart shelves as they further denude the store of Charmin. No one has decided to thoroughly crack down upon this with the ostentatious alacrity that the likes of de Blasio and Chronister have with church services, even though there’s no constitutional right to TP.
There is, however, the freedom to assemble and freedom of religion, both front-loaded right at the very top of the Bill of Rights. They’re both unpopular right now, and justifiably so. That said, officials like Sheriff Chronister and Mayor de Blasio are hardly making things better by setting themselves on a crash course for that drunken brawl with the First Amendment.
It’s a battle they’ll potentially lose, and one that has critical implications not just for our ability to fight coronavirus but also maintain our constitutional rights.
If the government can suspend those rights now, there’s nothing to stop it from doing so in the future, and not just in the face of a pandemic. When the government takes a little bit of rope from us, it doesn’t give it back easily.
As we contain this virus — and we will contain it — it’s high time we consider what kind of country we’re going to be on the other side. It doesn’t look like a pretty picture from here.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
