Dr. Anthony Fauci: To keep churches safe, use masks, limit singing and wait to resume Communion
“If you are in a region, a city, a county, where there is a significant amount of infection, I think with distributing Communion, I think that would be risky. I'm telling you that as a Catholic, it would be risky.”
“As many times as a priest can wash his hands, he gets to Communion, he puts it in somebody’s hand, they put it in their mouth...it’s that kind of close interaction that you don’t want when you’re in the middle of a deadly outbreak,” he said.
Dr. Fauci said he believes some people should continue to avoid crowded situations whenever possible, including religious services. He said that in the short time since the coronavirus was discovered, churches have been shown to be particularly risky in terms of creating clusters of infection.
“There have been situations in multiple countries where the source of the cluster was a church service,” he said. “That's the reason why we gotta be so careful about that.”
As a result, even if churches are open, the elderly and those with underlying medical conditions should consider staying home, “because they really are at high risk,” he said. “It would be so tragic for someone who just comes to a place of worship, gets sick themselves, or gets infected and brings it home to an elderly person who might have a compromising comorbidity, and the person gets seriously ill and dies.”
MY CONCLUSION
Most American Bishops are in areas where they are taking very high risks, as are the elderly and those with vulnerable medical conditions. When we should not be singing under any conditions or even speaking without a mask, and really don't have safe procedures for distributing communion, we should really be worshiping from home. After betraying our children to sexual abuse, the Bishops are betraying our elderly to the virus, all because of money.
God bless Dr. Fauci for speaking up. Clear-headed and credible advice are much needed. And the point about religious services being almost laboratory-perfect for spreading the virus is an urgent one.
ReplyDeleteI am not sure all the bishops should be painted with the same brush. Some of them are opening very cautiously, some less cautiously. In Chicago, there is still no official word on when masses, even with 10 persons at a time, would resume. And it's worth bearing in mind that the virus is not evenly distributed across the country; the risk might be less in some dioceses than others.
In my view, the more likely problem with distributing communion will not be bishops, it will be ministers of communion like me who are zealous about getting the Eucharist to people and are willing to take personal risks and bend or break some rules to do so. Those of us whose minds run in that direction need to stop and think, not only about the risks to ourselves, but to those we are trying to serve.
Jim, I'm with you about the desire to get the Eucharist to people. I think there are ways to do it safely, more than we are.
DeleteJack: After betraying our children to sexual abuse, the Bishops are betraying our elderly to the virus, all because of money.
ReplyDeleteYup. Collections are WAY down everywhere. So the religious "leaders" - evangelical and Catholic especially - are in a rush to re-open to get those collection baskets moving again.
That is why Trump declared that all churches should reopen. He doesn't care about the eventual deaths of old people. He doesn't care about people being deprived of spiritual sustenance. Or community. Nope.
He cares about votes.
That is his only motivation in pushing for churches to reopen. He doesn't want to weaken support from this very important part of his "base", which now includes most of the bishops of the Roman Catholic church.
He didn't go to church of course. He played golf, whining that it has been three months. He went to his own course, naturally, even though there are several excellent courses much closer to the White House. He also didn't note that during the last three months our weather here has been awful. Cold, gray,and a lot of rain. Not fun conditions for golfing. Deprived of his almost every weekend trips to Florida, he simply had to stay home and and feel sorry for himself.
Fauci is talking specifically about Host-in-the-hand. I suspect that you would have to revive him if you mentioned Host-in-the-mouth. And yet in-the-mouth is permitted, albeit discouraged, here if a) you go last and b) receive from the designated kamikaze. IMHO anyone who insists on in-the-mouth should be arrested for attempted murder, and the bishop and priests for abetting a felony. Besides, the mouth-breathers don't even follow the two conditions. But no one listens to ushers.
ReplyDeleteAlsooooo, it is assumed here theologically that old farts with "conditions," like me, are at risk and others are not. That has gone from being indicated to being just an urban legend. Acting on that principle is like acting on any of Trump's ideas, stupid.
"...Bishops are betraying our elderly to the virus, all because of money." That seems a little harsh, especially since all areas are still dispensed from Sunday obligation, as far as I know. Not all areas have the same degree of risk, and not all are opening at the same time.
ReplyDeleteOf course Trump's remarks were self serving, as always. Our archdiocese had planned a limited reopening well before his ill-considered declaration.
Our pastor put out a detailed plan for what procedures our parish will follow for reopening. It seems sensible and well thought out. It was emphasized several times that no one is obliged, and anyone who is high risk should stay home.
My husband is scheduled to assist at the altar this evening, and I plan to attend as well. Will let you know how it turns out.
At some point, probably now, certainly by mid-June, it's every man for himself.
ReplyDeletePeople want to eat in restaurants, shop in stores, sing, take communion however they want, get haircuts, have family reunions, go to the beach, and you can't control them and the gummint won't be able to. You can only control yourself.
If you're old and sick in America, you are expendable. Keep that in the front of your mind. Write out your preferred treatment plan so that if/when you get sick you get the care you want, always with the caveat that if the virus flares up, they will triage, and you are not going to be a priority.
Get your affairs in order. Make your peace with God and man now. Do not rely on the kindness of strangers.
I got a haircut yesterday. Probably not interesting enough to merit an entire post. There were a few additional measures taken at the national chain outpost I went to. The stylist was pretty adept at using her comb to lift the mask straps away from my ears so she could cut around them. I gave her a record tip, for me, because she was out of work for two months. I asked her if she had been doing off-the-books cuts out of her home but she said she hadn't; has kids at home and didn't want to invite others in.
DeleteI just buzz mine off with Raber's Wahl clippers and a no. 8 guard attachment. Saves a lot of money and is nice and cool.
DeleteNo beauty/barber shops will open here until at least next week, but COVID cases have fall off.
Barbers were giving haircuts at the Capitol in protest of closure regulations a few weeks ago. They have been leading the anti-Whitmer charge.
If any of the local EC or even RC churches around here figure out a way to do outdoor liturgies I might attend- and stay way in the back. No communion for anytime in the near future no matter how they do it.
ReplyDeleteAs Jean notes, it's every man (woman) for himself (herself) now.
A few days ago I read about new cases in two churches in the south - not Catholic, or EC or mainstream protestant, so doubt there was any kind of communion. They reopened and closed again after two weeks because of the new cases in the congregations.
It's still out there. Most people won't die if they get it. But some will. Those at super high-risk, like Jean and my husband, will have to push back normal life even longer than most of the population, because the others out there won't be worrying much about infecting someone else unknowingly. Since I could infect my husband should I be infected, I will have to remain with him in self-isolation also.
Once everything gets going and everyone abandons social distancing/masks we will have a better idea of whether or not this virus has been tamed, or is underground, and be better able to decide when to venture out again.
Both my nurse contacts, both in hotspot hospitals, one in a COVID ward, tested negative for antibodies. Apparently, if one consistently does what is recommended and uses one's head, one can stay clear of this pathogen, even in a COVID factory. Jean, I think with your situation, you deserve an N95 mask. I hope they become more available.
ReplyDeleteI think the KN95 ones (the K signifies made in China) are pretty widely available now. The little local pharmacy we get stuff from had them. I had to alter the ear loops so they'd fit right, but you just had to call them and you could get a package at the drive through.
DeleteOur pharmacy didn't have any ... but they still don't have toilet paper. I will have Raber look at the Home Depot.
DeleteHardly noticed yesterday (the media can barely handle two big stories at once), the Supremes ruled that religious liberty does not allow churches to open during a pandemic if the governor says they should be closed. Case from California.
ReplyDeleteYou would think that would shut up the folks who are claiming the right to hold y'all come infection festivals. But the vote was 5-4. Chief Roberts joined the leftist liberal socialists to prevent the rest of his conservative majority from making complete asses of themselves. Not sure the majority could hold if it were the President of The United States wanting to reopen the church instead of just a couple of ministers. (Nice to see Kavanaugh is performing as expected. Sure would have hated to be wrong about the young man.)
A fourth story of the day, also woefully under-covered, was the opening shots in the Sino-American war. If I get some time I'll go into it in some detail with Chris Patten.
Our bishop had a preamble to the safety video the parish sent everyone basically inviting lapsed Catholics and the unchurched to come and worship. This seems to be a strange time for throwing wide the doors. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FLO1lusVtWQ
DeleteMaybe the bishop figures that people are more worried than usual about death, and meeting their maker, and can be frightened into the pews. Selling some fire insurance?
DeleteNo, if you watch the vid, he seems quite joyful, which is at odds with the tone of the times. He seems to live in his own little world that earthly realities rarely penetrate.
DeleteAgreed. He was pretty cheerful. Pandemic? What pandemic?
DeleteA letter to trump from two evangelicals on reopening. Some interesting points. One I hadn't seen -before - contacting the churc'/0s insurance company about potential liability risks.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.washingtonpost.com/religion/2020/05/23/dear-trump-your-call-allow-all-churches-reopen-was-dangerous-sincerely-two-evangelicals/
If most Catholics were REALLY concerned about the financial health of their parishes, they would continue to donate. There are many ways to do so, including the old-fashioned way of mailing in a check. But the "dollar a week" crowd hasn't been that interested in the financial stability of their parishes to begin with.
ReplyDeleteAs a treasurer of a small (250 members) nondenominational church many years back, I quickly learned that each and every attendee had to pull her/his weight of the place would go under. About 40% of the members were former Catholics and once they understood the extent of what was needed from them, they were among the best contributors.
If you treat people like adults, most will act like adults.
We switched our donation to automatic bank draft when this whole thing started. Much more convenient, wish we would have done it years ago.
DeleteKatherine, that is a good idea. I wonder if our parish has auto-deduct. Dave just continues to send a check.
DeleteJim, you're right - Catholics (and anyone who belongs to a church which is shut down) should continue to support their parish, and even their school, even during this time of shutdown. In our case, of course our collections have dropped off, but some of them have continued, enough to sustain our payroll and keep the lights on.
DeleteCompletely agree that automatic withdrawal makes it easier for the parish. Our parish has been begging parishioners to go to this method for years.
5:30 Mass tonight, first time in something like 11 weeks. I thought it went pretty well. Everyone was wearing a mask, except one person. People sat in the designated pews and observed proper distancing. But more than that, it seemed joyful. People seemed glad to see each other, even if they weren't really "seeing" much. Father said how glad he was to have a congregation again. The church normally seats about 350. My sources told me 44 were there tonight. So about 12.5% of capacity.
ReplyDeleteThe mask was a definite penance. I don't see how people wear them for a whole work shift. But worth the inconvenience. My choir leaders were there, having given up on doing music for awhile. They said it would have been impossible to do a decent job of singing with the mask. Which is what I had been saying.
I felt at least as safe as the senior hour at the grocery store, and a whole lot safer than at Dollar General.
Jim P, if you're still reading, how is your location handling Communion for the deacons, when they are assisting? Ours is intincting the Host for them. Which I wish they weren't. But they didn't ask me.
ReplyDeleteOne of the neighboring dioceses was planning to have Masses this weekend, but now they can't. Because one of the priests who attended the recent ordination came down with COVID. So all the priests who were there have to quarantine for two weeks.
Hi Katherine - we're not doing any public masses yet around here. At the pre-recorded masses we're continuing to do, the priest gives the deacon communion in the hand. And a separate cup is consecrated for the deacon.
DeleteOne awkward aspect of this, which I haven't completely figured out yet, is the ritual cleansing of the vessels afterward. As you know, one first consumes any remaining Precious Blood (which isn't an issue in this time of COVID-19; there are no shared, communal cups, and only a tiny amount is consecrated in the cups for our priest and deacon). One is then supposed to wipe any crumbs or fragments remaining on the paten and/or ciboria into one of the cups; then one is supposed to swirl water in the cups to ritually rinse them, and then drink the water before wiping the cups clean with the purificator.
The awkwardness is: I don't want to drink any liquid that originates from the priest's cup after he has drunk from it. I'm going to talk to him about it (thanks for this conversation; it's spurred me to action). I'd much prefer that we each ritually cleanse our own vessels. (For that matter, I'm ok without having a chalice at all, although the chalice has special meaning for a deacon so I certainly don't object).
Jim, I like the idea of the separate chalice for the deacon, and each of them purifying their own vessel. The way our priest does it, with intincting the Host and placing it on the deacon's tongue, sort of works against the instruction given to the congregation that they were to receive in the hand or go to the back of the line. I don't know if there is a canon law provision that the priest is to receive from the chalice first, but that is what happens. He does finish off the rest and purify the chalice himself now. My husband doesn't worry about it. It mainly bugs me. Like you he would be fine with just receiving the Host. I guess it's a pretty minimal chance of contagion, since the altar wine they use is 36 proof.
DeleteThe intincting is something I hadn't thought about. I think there are legal restrictions for when it may or may not be done, although I can't recite chapter and verse on it. I never see it done (at least licitly) around here. During normal times, our EMs are instructed not to permit people to do their own intincting. Maybe it's ok if the priest intincts on their behalf.
DeleteThe permission for the priest to intinct for the deacon came from the archbishop. I'm pretty sure it didn't apply to doing it for the congregants, or for them to do it themselves.
DeleteI sent a note to my pastor this morning, outlining my health-related qualms about purifying his chalice and asking him if he'd be willing to do it himself. His reply: "Sure, no problem." I'm pretty blessed. Probably too blessed: something will happen to screw this up (our having this guy as our pastor).
DeleteWhat someone like me finds astonishing about all of this is that this deals with man-made rules. Canon law is man-made. The GIRM is man-made.
DeleteI'm quite sure that Jesus would be astonished by this situation also. And he would say to use common sense. He ignored a whole lot of rules when it made sense. For example he healed people on the sabbath. A big No,No for 1st century Jewish rules literalists.
I'm glad Jim's pastor has common sense. I honestly don't understand why the RCC forbids the communicants from intincting the host by themselves if they choose anyway. At one time the RCC forbade the lowly laity to even touch a host with their impure, unconsecrated hands. Better for a priest to be forced to touch their unsanitary tongues. Perhaps the holiness of their hands protected them from germs acquired by communion on the tongue? They still had to look at them. Poor things. At one time Catholics were forbidden to use cremation if they wanted a funeral mass as a sendoff. ALL man-made rules, Some were changed. The intinction rule should also be changed for everyone once the world returns to ordinary time in the other sense.
But in this case, since it's health related, the man-made rules should definitely be changed. Good for the pastor.
One priest I know said about receiving Communion in the hands that most people commit more sins with their mouth than they do with their hands, so he didn't see the point that receiving on the tongue was somehow "holier".
DeleteYes, good that Jim's pastor used common sense.
"What someone like me finds astonishing about all of this is that this deals with man-made rules. Canon law is man-made. The GIRM is man-made."
DeleteYes. The US Constitution also is man-made. So are speeding laws. So are workplace sexual harassment regulations. In fact, we are surrounded by, and constrained by, man-made laws throughout our day. But because they are made by men doesn't mean that they are therefore arbitrary or foolish. Nor does it mean that they are therefore completely exclusive of God or his will for us.
The Anglican Communion has its equivalents of canon law and liturgical law. They're also man-made. Do they also astonish you?
The EC is far, far less rigid when it comes to this type of thing. If they had the same rigidity I wouldn’t stay in their pews.
DeleteThere was no written canon law until the 20th century. It has changed more than once since first developed. A lot of the RCs man made rules have changed over its history.
So it seems wrong to be totally nflexible in the face of posing a health risk to deacons or priests or laity. Christians are supposed to try to do the right thing. The two great commandments are to love. If you love your fellow human beings you want to try to not harm them, especially deliberately. It doesn’t hurt God to allow intinction or to change the cleansing routine.
God might be unhappy if following a man made rule inflexibly caused harm to someone. Love demands doing what is right, not blindly following rules that can cause harm under specific circumstances.
The Constitution has been amended many times. Its meaning has been reinterpreted many times. Traffic laws, workplace rules - all change, are removed, updated, replaced etc when they either are no longer relevant or they cause actual harm, even if originally adopted with good intentions.
First do no harm isn’t just for doctors.
Anne, I encourage you to look more closely at the Catholic Church's efforts to adapt to these times. Many past practices are being set aside and adapted, at all levels, to accommodate to the reality in which we live now. At the same time, we Catholics don't easily set aside our laws; we recognize that they were enacted for reasons, and we seek to understand those reasons and their implications in the course of thinking through these adaptations. I hope you can see how responsible that is.
DeleteJim, I know that you are a responsible, well educated in the canon law etc, deacon. You have taken some vows and feel that you must be obedient.
DeleteBut, I will never believe that the obedience is given first to men instead of to God. It must be given to God, even though no human being - you, me, even Katherine and Jean (both possessed of great spiritual insights)- can KNOW that we are understanding God's will. This lack of perfect understanding includes the men in collars who write the canon laws and catechisms and GIRMs of the church - they too cannot know that they understand God's will. So we all try (most of the time) do our best, and that usually includes the men in collars - although not always. Lust for power and wealth has infected the highest levels of the church more than once throughout history and can be reflected in teachings and rules. This reality underlies the clericalism that has so damaged the RCC.
The rules of men are there for reasons - sometimes good reasons and sometimes not so good reasons - and they may need to be adjusted for circumstances. During a time like this, it's not possible to wait out the glacially slow workings of the church. At the church's normal pace, the PTB might be able to officially change the rules in time for a future pandemic, maybe in the 22nd century. Doesn't help now though unless people use their common sense. God gave everyone a mind and a conscience and expects us to use them.
Sometimes rules are eliminated (such as deciding its OK to give communion in the hand and returning the cup to the laity, who were denied it for centuries). There are canonized saints who at one time were officially called heretics. Some were excommunicated,only to be canonized centuries later.
They were excommunicated for refusing to recant and obey the men in charge. They believed that their obedience must be to God, even at the cost of excommunication. Later, MUCH, MUCH later, the church decided they were right after all.
I doubt that you would be excommunicated for deciding that your obedience to God may include preserving your health to do God's work. It is reasonable at this time to not deliberately expose yourself to a disease that could be fatal. Not likely at your age, but plenty of younger people have succumbed. Nobody knows their personal risk before becoming infected.
It doesn't matter what I think. You have to follow your own conscience, Jim, just as I try to follow my (well informed) conscience.
DeleteJust try not to get sick. That helps no-one, including your parish.
At our last EC liturgy in March the priest announced before communion that the infection risks from intinction are pretty much the same as sipping from the cup because the wine can become contaminated from either practice. Infection from either are rare, but possible.
ReplyDelete