To Mask or Not to Mask
Let me lay my cards on the table to start this conversation. I believe COVID was a real pandemic. I believe most pastors and leaders were making the best choices they could make at the time given regional restrictions and political temperature of their churches. I believe most restrictions were ineffective and draconian. I believe that some masks work and some masks were worthless.[1] I found the time surrounding COVID to be almost amusing (note: I was not in a true position of leadership and didn’t have to struggle through it. I simply studied the culture.) I think what made COVID such a confusing time was that long; historical perspectives did not always hold true to their beliefs.
In this week’s reading, Matthew Petrusek gives a deep dive overview of our cultural political landscape and maps it against the Catholic Church. He makes the argument, “This book will be making the case that the Catholic argument – the big argument on the best understanding of the nature and purpose of politics – holds up very well indeed, especially when examined in relation to secular alternatives.”[2] The secular alternatives he pits Catholicism against is, Utilitarianism, Liberalism and Libertarian, Progressivism (i.e., Wokeism) and non-theistic Conservatism. While Petrusek’s argument is historical and theoretical, it often missed the mark in demonstrating how these beliefs worked out in our modern political landscape. Though recently published, he neglected to offer insight regarding COVID. So, I want to think through his perspectives, mapped against some of Tim Harford’s arguments in How to Make the World Add Up and look at people’s responses to COVID.
At the first onset of the pandemic, COVID was all about the science. There was a utilitarian perspective to it. What do the numbers say? What did we know from science? We were initially told the nation was going to shut down for two-weeks to “flatten the curve.” The restrictions remained in place well beyond the two-weeks. Yet, even when flattening the curve proved to not have worked as hope there was still a segment of our community that took Hume’s perspective that, “Only scientific knowledge is valid knowledge. Everything else is, at best, fodder for a book hungry blaze.”[3] However, the science was shifting. The science became hard for many people to rely on.
Suddenly, many in society took Harford’s perspective that we shouldn’t take statistics for granted. Harford argues Trump simply made-up numbers in his administration and tried to get others to believe them.[4] Trump, quickly shifted his tune and began to see the political divide. Suddenly, masking became tribal. Regarding COVID, Harford writes, “Paradoxically, it can be much easier to spot tribalism when you are standing off to one side… It’s easier when you belong to the tribe of bemused outsiders.”[5] Since I had just returned to the United States after living overseas, I found myself a bemused outsider, critiquing the tribes on both sides.
The Liberal perspective has typically taken the approach of, “You do you, I’ll do me.”[6] Yet, in the face of a public health threat, this approach was no longer valid since the pandemic crossed all boundaries. Instead, the approach was more of a form of Woke Utilitarianism. Here is what I mean by this. The Progressive or Woke ideology stresses, “If a member of a favored identity group says something is true, it must be true no matter what the facts are.”[7] In the case of COVID, the favored identity by the Woke group were those who always donned masks. These were not simply the people following the laws, these were the people hiking in the middle of the woods still wearing cloth masks. It was a tribal identity, not a scientifically backed rationale. This Woke perspective heavily relied upon the scientific perspectives of Utilitarianism. Even when the science was not always there, the focus was still on tribal identity.
This Woke Utilitarian perspective was what allowed our nation to shut our eyes and close our ears to the older generation who reside in nursing homes or who were hospitalized. Many people, suffering from COVID or other illnesses, were simply written off as no longer useful for society. Many of those individuals who were on the wrong side of the Woke tribal identity were also deemed to be the last recipients of the medical equipment based on the fact that they didn’t wear a useless cloth mask. What the different political perspectives had in common was that many of the decisions made were made in fear. Rationale and science-based data was surpassed by a deep fear in many people.
I might continue to look at how perspectives shifted over the course of the pandemic, or how it was regionally different. However, I do not have space to cover three years of political discourse. I do want to end with a Christ focused perspective though (Certainly not the only Christ-centered perspective.) A Christ-centered approach recognizes that all humans are created in the image of God and everyone has inherent value. A Christ-centered approach remembers that we are kingdom ambassadors, not a part of local tribes. A Christ-centered approach does not dismiss the science but recognizes that the science can be valuable even though it is not the ultimate truth. Our theology should help discern the science and tribalism. A Christ-centered approach should be deeply disturbed that many patients were left alone in hospitals with no one by their side as the passed away. We recognize God’s sovereignty over both the individual’s souls as well as the pandemic. A Christ-centered approach is willing to don a mask and follow the governmental laws but chooses to live a life without fear. A Christ-centered approach recognizes mankind’s temporal status and vulnerability and Christ’s eternal perspective and superiority. May we never have to go through such a pandemic as a society again.
____________________________________________________________________
[1] Mayo Clinic, based in my city, banned all non-medical masks on their campuses within weeks of the pandemic. They determined and knew cloth masks were completely ineffective. Yet, cloth mask mandates remained public policy way beyond the medical knowledge.
[2] Matthew Petrusek, Evangelization and Ideology: How to Understand and Respond to the Political Culture (Park Ridge, IL: Word on Fire, 2023), 13.
[3] Petrusek, 160.
[4] Tim Harford, How to Make the World Add up: Ten Rules for Thinking Differently about Numbers (London: The Bridge Street Press, 2021), 203.
[5] Harford, 9.
[6] Petrusek, 212.
[7] Petrusek, 331.
About the Author
Adam Cheney
I grew up in California, spent five years living along the beautiful coast of Kenya and now find myself working with refugees in the snow crusted tundra of Minnesota. My wife and I have seven children, four of whom have been adopted. I spend my time drinking lots of coffee, working in my garden, and baking sourdough bread.13 responses to “To Mask or Not to Mask”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Adam,
I like how your brought Harford into this week’s reading. His book was a little lighter. COVID was a mess and we, as a society, are still dealing with the fallout from all the missteps that were taken. I read this book over Spring Break because I had something else going on the day that I typically devote to my reading. Since then, I was listening to a podcast (Holy Post podcast # 610) and they were discussing the history of the Catholic church’s position of when life began. They discussed how it bounced back and forth over the years and it was in more recent history (1869) in which they concluded that life begins at conception. They discussed how the early church initially held an Aristotelian belief of when life began. So even the church has been impacted by philosophies and not just the Scriptures. Of course the church has also been influenced by culture and politics throughout history. I need to take more time reading Petrusek’s book. I value a lot of Catholic Social Thought and I teach some basic philosophy, so I want to spend more time digesting this book. I know I was not fully engaged mentally when reading this book and probably missed a lot.
I appreciate your Christ-Centered approach with which you finished your post. How do we go about getting the church to be less tribal and more Christ-Centered in the things that really matter?
Phil Vischer, “610: “Learning to Respectfully Disagree with John Inazu,” March 27, 2024, in The Holy Post Podcast, produced by Holy Post Media LLC., podcast, https://www.holypost.com/post/610-learning-to-disagree-respectfully-with-john-inazu
Jeff,
I think that the church needs to know it is okay to not be in one of the tribes. There are churches and denominations on both ends of the spectrum that would vehemently disagree with me here. But, I think that we need Jesus followers to fully embrace the kingdom we are a part of and that we are not a part of either tribe.
Adam, the pandemic is a very relevant topic to correlate with Petrusek’s writings. This unfortunate global social experiment got many things wrong; however, society still seems to be living in the mode of tribalistic division.
How might you navigate communications about (American) tribalism with your Somali community who emigrated away from tribalism in their home communities?
Jennifer,
Somalis did not immigrate away from tribalism. It is possible that they immigrated even into a deeper tribalism than before. I have had plenty of political discussions with Somalis. I have found that it is always an easy topic to begin discussing and then transition to Jesus. I talk about how following the life of Jesus doesn’t allow me to be in either tribe since I am in his kingdom and that is my focus.
Thanks Adam. I appreciate your post and the way you applied Petrusek’s work to the COVID pandemic. You’ve helped me better understand how tribalism and identity shape many of our decisions today. How can churches engage our current political realities with the Christ-centered approach you mention at the end of your post?
Ryan,
As I mentioned to Jeff, Christians need to be reminded that we are not part of either tribe and each tribal identity has markings on it that are not Christlike. Being 3rd party or independent should become more acceptable in our society and our churches. I am not saying we can’t vote or that we can’t vote within the party system, but we need to normalize being outside of red and blue tribes.
Hi Adam,
Ah the pandemic! What a difficult time that was in so many ways.
I’m curious if you saw the same tribalism in the immigrant communities you work with, or in the communities in Kenya that you keep up with. Do you think Petrusek’s book is helpful for these contexts?
Christy,
Both the Somali people and the Digo people of Kenya are deeply tribalistic. Tribal ties run very deep. I think that Petrusek’s book is relevant in the American context but Islam and politics are very distinctly different and not really comparable to any of the four political theories presented in the book.
Fascinating analysis of the pandemic vis-a-vis Petrusek’s book.
I think it’s important to note that identity is formed based on how we answer the questions, “What would my people do in this situation? What are my people like?” Some might call that tribalism, yet we are always asking ourselves, “What would Jesus do now?” What do you think? We belong to Jesus; is that a form of tribalism too?
(Just opening the nearest can of worms…)
Debbie,
Being a follower of Jesus is certainly a tribe of its own but not one that should develop into tribalism. Instead, Christians should be about bringing others into the tribe, and remembering that we don’t own the tribe, we were invited in ourselves.
Hey Adam, I appreciated reading your post and felt your concerns about COVID. I will side with you there as you speak of the Christ-centered approach. What are some things we can say or ask questions to bring that Christ-centered approach to those who may be closed-minded and entrenched in tribal identity?
Daren,
Listening to people, hearing their opinion and their perspective and then gently poking holes in their ardent beliefs. This is what Petrusek attempts to do, though many might state that he did it a bit aggressive.
You had me at the title, Adam! I really appreciate and agree with your Christ-centered approaches at the end. In what ways do you see yourself applying these perspectives in your life and ministry today?