Yesterday morning, on The Lord’s Day, an organized group of anti-ICE Leftist agitators deliberately entered Cities Church in Saint Paul, Minnesota, during the worship service and intentionally disrupted the gathered assembly.

The group acted in coordination, seeking to intimidate both the pastor and the congregation, including the many young children present.

Video evidence and subsequent public statements make clear that the objective was to unsettle the congregation and to demonstrate vulnerability during public worship. The disruption targeted Christians precisely as Christians, assembled for the worship of God. This was a targeted intrusion into the free exercise of religion, carried out with forethought and purpose.

In the aftermath, various government officials have issued statements condemning the disruption. Promises have been made to investigate the incident and to determine whether civil rights laws have been violated. Such statements are appropriate as far as they go. Christians may rightly welcome public condemnations of the unlawful and unacceptable disruption of public worship.

But expressions of concern do not exhaust the responsibility of our elected and appointed government officials. What has been promised must now be executed. Under God, governing authorities are not commanded to merely signal their personal disapproval of wrongdoing. No, civil government is commanded by God to use the authority they have been granted by God to punish evil and are held accountable before God for doing so (Romans 13:1-17).

The punishment of those who intentionally disrupt the worship of God is not a matter of political discretion. It is a duty imposed by God Himself. Scripture teaches that government is ordained to restrain evil by lawful force. When coercive intimidation is directed at the church, the civil government’s obligation must be engaged directly, swiftly, and decisively.

More than Sternly Worded Statements

Again, Christians can and should be grateful for statements made by public officials condemning such wicked actions. However, among right-wing politicians, a pattern has emerged in which sternly worded statements too often serve as an alternative to enforcing the law. 

These actions create the appearance of seriousness while deferring the actual work of justice. Over time, this pattern reshapes public expectations. Wrongdoing by leftist radicals is condemned rhetorically, while consequences are indefinitely postponed.

Such an approach is particularly damaging when directed at acts of intimidation. Coercive disruption achieves its aim not merely through the immediate disturbance but through the uncertainty that follows. When offenders are left unpunished, the message communicated is not limited to the original incident. It creates a chilling effect that extends into the future.

The psychological dimension of such acts is integral to their design. The intrusion into worship seeks to unsettle ordinary obedience. The disruption signals that worship may be disrupted and that the state may hesitate to respond decisively.

When punishment is delayed or withheld, that announcement is reinforced. Intimidation does not require repetition when it is validated by inaction. A single unpunished offense establishes precedent. It teaches that religious assemblies may be targeted without consequence and that the state’s protection is at best uncertain.

In other words, if no action is taken to hold these lawless disruptors accountable, the message is loud and clear: It’s open season on Christian churches in America.

Justice in such circumstances cannot remain abstract. It must take visible, public, unambiguous form. Without enforcement, condemnation becomes inert, and law loses its restraining function.

The Government’s Responsibility Before God

Romans 13 provides the most direct biblical instruction concerning civil authority. The magistrate is described as a servant of God, appointed to govern for the public good. Central to that prescription is the bearing of the sword. The sword signifies lawful force applied in response to wrongdoing. Scripture explicitly connects the magistrate’s authority with the execution of wrath upon the wrongdoer.

The restraining function of law depends upon consequence. Fear of punishment is not presented as a defect in justice but as one of its instruments. When wrongdoing carries no cost, restraint collapses. The magistrate’s failure to punish enables and emboldens future evil.

The gathered worship of the church occupies a defined and protected space within the moral order. It is not merely an expressive activity. It is an act of obedience rendered corporately to God. This reality precedes the state and therefore shapes the state’s authority.

The free exercise of religion, therefore, refers not only to private belief but to embodied practice. Public worship is central to that practice. The state is obligated to protect Christian worship precisely because it does not originate from the state’s permission. This is our sacred First Amendment right in America.

The Minnesota incident involved deliberate entry into a worship service to disrupt it. That action constituted an invasion of a protected assembly. It disrupted public order and interfered with religious exercise simultaneously. A society that refuses to defend the integrity of worship services cannot plausibly claim to defend ordered liberty. 

The government’s response to such offenses must be clear and timely. Existing legal frameworks already address conspiracy against constitutional rights, intentional interference with the free exercise of religion, coercive intimidation, unlawful disruption of lawful assemblies, criminal trespass undertaken for the purpose of disruption, breaches of the peace, crimes committed with a religious nexus, and intentionally intimidating or interfering with the exercise of religious freedom at a place of worship. None of these frameworks requires novel legal theories or speculative interpretation. The relevant elements are well established, and the conduct at issue falls squarely within them. Prolonged delay in such circumstances does not signal procedural care or neutrality but reluctance to enforce the law as written.

Speed matters because delay reshapes expectations. Ecclesiastes warns that when sentences are not executed promptly, confidence in wrongdoing increases (Ecc. 8:11). That principle applies directly to targeted disruptions of worship. Each unpunished incident reduces the perceived risk of repetition.

Enforcement must also be sufficient to deter future offenses. Proportional punishment affirms the seriousness of the act and reinforces the boundaries that protect public order. Treating such disruptions as minor disturbances communicates that worship is negotiable and that intimidation carries little cost.

Decisive enforcement in this case serves the broader good. It protects families. It stabilizes communities. It affirms that religious assemblies remain secure under law. And it acknowledges the lordship of Christ.

A Charge to Civil Authorities

All those who are in positions of authority have been ordained by God. This, of course, includes President Donald Trump, Attorney General Pam Bondi, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, and the Mayor of Saint Paul, Kaohly Her.

They operate under Divine accountability for how they discharge their office. Scripture presents rulers as accountable for how they wield the authority entrusted to them. Failure to punish wrongdoing is a failure of the office of magistrate, especially when the wrongdoing interferes with the worship of God as Scripture commands.

And if “lesser magistrates” won’t uphold the law, higher authorities must. Civil authorities cannot get a “pass” simply because holding them accountable may look “partisan.”

As Joe Rigney explained today:

“Responsibility for this lawlessness is squarely placed not only on the agitators themselves, but the Democratic politicians who have aided and encouraged them—from Joe Biden, who willfully allowed the mass invasion of illegal migrants during his four years in office, to Gov. Tim Walz and Mayor Jacob Frey, who have refused to cooperate with federal agents and instead have encouraged their activists to ‘protest loudly, urgently, but also peacefully.’ The last qualification is a vain and ineffectual attempt to contain the chaos and disorder that Walz has unleashed on Minnesota’s citizens. For the left, their only law is lawlessness.”

Thankfully, it appears that Trump’s DOJ does intend to pursue real action against one of the leading agitators yesterday, media personality Don Lemon. This morning, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the DOJ, Harmeet Dhillon, announced her intention to charge Lemon under the “Ku Klux Klan Act.”

This is a good start. But still more must be done. More lawbreakers must be held accountable, including the organizers of the attack and everyone involved. The events of this past Sunday require more than strongly worded statements. This is not a case where extensive fact-finding is needed. The facts are established: the leaders of this act of evil have self-identified themselves and made their intent explicit, and the harm was real.

True justice now requires real actions, not mere words.