1984: Contemporary Concerns About Thought Crimes

The main character, Winston Smith, in George Orwell’s 1984, enters his apartment’s stairwell while encountering posters on every landing bearing the caption, “BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU.”[1] Orwell depicts a government system that constantly monitors its citizens’ body language and facial expressions. In 1984, a “thought crime” referred to any person’s thoughts that the regime ideologically opposed. Any slight sign of discontent could lead the “Thought Police” to arrest and charge the citizen—a frightening world when you think about it. While it may seem outlandish, is it really that far-fetched?

In 2022, Adam Smith-Connor, who served 20 years in the British Army Reserves, was found guilty of violating a buffer zone when witnesses saw him praying silently with his head bowed near an abortion clinic in Bournemouth, UK. “The defendant was charged under the Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO), a broad censorship order that localities can issue under a 2014 law to curb ‘anti-social behavior.’”[2] The court sentenced Smith-Conner to two years’ conditional discharge and to pay nearly $12,000 in court costs.[3]

In November 2022 and February 2023, UK Police arrested Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, a Christian charity worker, for silently praying in a censored area near an abortion clinic in England. “The zone, covering several streets in the Kings Norton area of Birmingham, was installed by local authorities via a Public Spaces Protection Order and banned all expressions of “approval or disapproval with respect to issues related to abortion services, by any means” within a large vicinity of an abortion facility.”[4] The following statute, which led to her arrest, is now a national law in the UK:

The Public Order Act, adopted by the British Government in 2023, will ban all forms of ‘influencing’ within 150 meters of all abortion facilities nationwide. The ambiguous wording of the ban has worried volunteers that engaging in consensual conversation, praying, or simply offering a leaflet about help services available will lead to a criminal conviction, in further breach of rights to freedom of speech and thought.[5]

Vaughan-Spruce was later acquitted of the charges and received compensation for her arrest.

These two examples must cause Christians to ask, “Who determines what is or is not a thought crime?” Moreover, how is a person tried and convicted based on their thoughts? You can probably think of several more pressing questions but for the sake of space, I will limit this article to these two.

Who Decides?

The examples above demonstrate that the British government enacted laws governing “anti-social behavior” that includes silent prayer near abortion clinics. This kind of censorship aims to protect “victims” from perceived harm and silence anyone who might oppose them. By passing the law, reflected above, the British government has decided that the right to access an abortion clinic takes precedence over an individual’s right to pray silently near an abortion clinic. The simple act of praying silently near an abortion clinic qualifies as criminal behavior, similar to a “thought crime” in Orwell’s 1984.

In 1984, Big Brother criminally charged citizens when the universal surveillance measures exposed their wavering loyalty to the regime. In the previously mentioned cases involving our British brother and sister, the police asked them what they were doing. Rightly, they told the truth. Jesus warns, “I have told you these things so that in me you may have peace. You will have suffering in this world. Be courageous! I have conquered the world” (Jn. 16:33 CSB).  I am thankful that some in Great Britain agree that this is an outrageous government overreach. However, what of those who applaud the government’s actions? How should Christians respond if this activity were to come to our communities?

Think Biblically

Christians must look to Scripture to understand that God has not been silent about authority figures. For example, Potipher and Pharaoh’s houses flourished because God’s hand was on Joseph, even in his captivity (Gen. 39–40). Daniel became a high official in Cyrus’s court even though he disobeyed the king’s decree (Dan. 2 & 6). God instructed Israel to pray for the well-being of Babylon, so that the city would prosper, and by extension, God’s people would also prosper (Jer. 29:7).

In the New Testament, Jesus spoke harshly against the Jewish religious leaders but never told his followers to rise against Rome. Jesus delineates God’s and Rome’s interests when he states in Matthew, “Give, then, to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (Matt. 22:21 CSB). Paul regularly confronts religious hypocrisy and false teachings in the Book of Acts and the Pauline Epistles. Still, he stops short of calling for open rebellion against the civil authorities over him and the church. In his letter to the Roman churches, Paul exhorts the Roman Christians to submit to the government, a government of greater severity than in the current American context, because it is God’s instrument (Rom. 13:1-7). Paul commands Timothy to instruct the Ephesian churches to pray for authority figures and for their salvation (1 Tim. 2:1-3). God speaks to his people. We must realize that our Perfect Savior willingly suffered at the hands of a pagan government, and we are certainly not better than him.

To reflect a Christ-centered way in culture, Christians respect and submit to lawful authorities even if we disagree with them. The weapons of our resistance are not kinetic in nature, they are spiritual—truth, righteousness, the gospel, salvation, faith, Scripture, and prayer (Eph. 6:10-18). Christians must:

• Pray for government leaders and all in authority.
• Submit to the laws of the government unless they contradict Scripture.
• Share the gospel. The gospel transforms individuals and communities.
• Vote, if you are able, informed by Scripture. Analyze the issues and the candidates.

To be faithful witnesses, Christians must live graciously and wisely in the outworking of our daily lives. We must strive to be part of the solution, not part of the problem.

Live Wisely

The rise of modern technology—such as the internet and smart listening devices like Alexa, Siri, and others—although not available in the 1940s, definitely makes “private” conversations less private. Orwell writes:

Even the Catholic Church of the Middle Ages was tolerant by modern standards. Part of the reason for this was that in the past no government had the power to keep its citizens under constant surveillance. The invention of print, however, made it easier to manipulate public opinion, and the film and the radio carried the process further. With the development of television, and the technical advance which made it possible to receive and transmit simultaneously on the same instrument, private life came to an end.[6]

Orwell’s 1984 is disturbingly reflected in much of today’s culture. His work highlights attempts to rewrite history, redefine words, restrict personal freedoms, and expand the government’s role in people’s lives. The fact that community members are willing to accept, even gradually, private thoughts as criminal is, to say the least, troubling.

The apostle Peter reminds Christians to submit to and honor those in authority (1 Pet. 2:13–17). He also encourages believers to be willing to suffer for righteousness (1 Pet. 3:14–17). Lastly, Peter urges Christians not to be surprised when they suffer because they live holy lives (1 Pet. 4:12–19). Therefore, Christian, if the Thought Police come for you, how then should you respond? “Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor (1 Pet. 2:17).”