.....The Answer Lies in Thinking of This As a Time of Exile" Time Magazine explores the pluses and minuses of reopening churches.

"The Christian faith as a whole has been reduced, in the public mind, to a “private” movement in the sense that – so many say – it should have no place in public life. Thus I can still go shopping in the crowded little off-licence (in America, the liquor store) on the corner; but I cannot go and sit in the ancient, prayer-soaked chapel across the street. Worship becomes invisible. Shutting churches will appear to collude with this. By saying that we will temporarily abolish corporate worship and join with others only on live-streamed services from the vicar’s living room, we may seem to be agreeing that really we are just a group of like-minded individuals pursuing our rather arcane private hobby....
..... I am appalled by reports of would-be devout but misguided people ignoring safety regulations because they believe that as Christians they are automatically protected against disease, or that (as I heard someone say on television) “you’ll be safe inside church because the devil can’t get in there.” (I wanted to say: Trust me, lady, I’m a bishop: the devil knows his way in there as well as anybody else.)
That is the kind of superstition that gets Christian faith a bad name. Equally, the debates about locking churches can easily stir up lesser controversies, between those for whom the building and all its bits and pieces has been a vital part of their spirituality, and those for whom all such things are irrelevant since one can worship God anywhere."

Just for argument sake, let’s say the devil can’t get in church. If you have a bunch of people congregating, it’s not the devil you need to worry about.

CrispingPin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just for argument sake, let’s say the devil
> can’t get in church. If you have a bunch of
> people congregating, it’s not the devil you need
> to worry about.

The kind of "Faith" (Group think, tribalism, herd mentality) that leads groups to believe they are an exception to the rule. is toxic and potentially fatal.

A significant number of attendees at Christian churches are the over-65 crowd. This is the last group you want to pack together in an enclosed space.

People sit in close proximity to others for an hour at a time. Duration of exposure seems to greatly increase the likelihood of being infected. Just passing someone on the street or even in a store is not likely to transmit an infection. Sitting next to an infected person for an hour (or two for Mormons!) is considerably more dangerous.

Talking to congregants for an hour after service at "coffee hour" has the same problem - face to face exposure for minutes at a time, with the added danger of talking, which creates aerosol droplets. At least Mormons don't do a coffee hour.

Kids running/crawling around at church are great disease vectors too.

Passing and preparing the sacrament in LDS services - euwww.


Short answer - no, they shouldn't reopen, until at least all vulnerable members are vaccinated. That could take years.

Brother Of Jerry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Passing and preparing the sacrament in LDS
> services - euwww.

It is really interesting to see how LDS inc big shots are going to try working around that one. They have a big problems in any approach to the matter.

CDC estimates that if a choir congregates to sing together and don't wear masks (kind of hard to sound good with mask on), here's the results if ONE PERSON has contagious COVID-19:

87% of the choir will likely get infected.

Even 6 foot distance wouldn't be great because singers disperse particles in the air all around them for much more than 6 feet.

When I’m standing in a line with the six foot rule, it’s so hard to resist breaking into song.

I could see maybe one service per week with family groups widely spaced. Perhaps they could rotate family attendance at once every 2-4 weeks. I don't see any way that they can do communion or baptisms safely.

It's a shame for Christians because communion is at the heart of their faith. But IMO this is just not the time for it as it has traditionally been done.

You couldn't pay me to attend a church service right now. But I know it's important to many.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/22/2020 05:36PM by summer.

One priest was dispensing holy water with a squirt gun. Not very dignified, but certainly pragmatic.

I've always thought communion was the single most bizarre aspect of Christianity (the Endowment is weirder, but Mo only), and it wouldn't bother me any to see it go completely virtual/symbolic.

Brother Of Jerry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> One priest was dispensing holy water with a squirt
> gun. Not very dignified, but certainly pragmatic.
>
> I've always thought communion was the single most
> bizarre aspect of Christianity (the Endowment is
> weirder, but Mo only), and it wouldn't bother me
> any to see it go completely virtual/symbolic.

So if you wave a $20 Bill at him will he hit you with a Super Sin Soaker? It makes church like Mardi Gras!
Show Us Yer Tits Father John!

The only way I could see communion working safely is if every family brings its own bread cubes, cups, and water. At the designated moment, everyone holds up their bread and water for a priesthood blessing. I'm not sure if that squares with Mormon practice, but I could see it working.

I agree with you that communion could be viewed as a bizarre ritual, but it has the ability to bond the believer with the wider church community and also with the concept of Christ and the belief in the resurrection.

UCC churches are doing virtual communion. Have your bread and juice/wine ready. Zoom, Facebook and YouTube.

. . . my teenage son proposes that when TCOJCOLDS gets going again, they should stagger attendance, so members only attend every other week, or even once every 3 weeks . . .

Interestingly, I think HE ACTUALLY HOPES THAT WILL HAPPEN so he won't have to go to church so often.

I wonder how many LDS teens are thinking the same thing?

mrx Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> . . . my teenage son proposes that when TCOJCOLDS
> gets going again, they should stagger attendance,
> so members only attend every other week, or even
> once every 3 weeks . . .
>
> Interestingly, I think HE ACTUALLY HOPES THAT WILL
> HAPPEN so he won't have to go to church so often.
>
> I wonder how many LDS teens are thinking the same
> thing?

LOL, my teenage son, left church after Sacrment once and I loooked at my TBM wife and said, "I'll handle this."
I went out to the mini van where he was standing and said, "Why'd you walk out?"
Because I'm not going back in there.
WHy not?
Because its boring and those people are stupid.
Well. I can't argue with you there.
Where would you rather be?
I dunno. Hooters? (which was 3 blocks away)
I said, "I think your Mom would give me a quicky divorce if I took you there."
He thought Hooters was heaven on Earth after his ExMo Grandpa (my Dad) took him there for his 12th Birthday.
He later filled the Bishop's Son-In-Law's car with balloons that said, "I Love Hooters" on them so when he opened it in front of the Bishop, for the Bishop's daughter upon leaving her wedding reception, they all fell out, in front of all of his friends, family and ward.
To their credit, even the Mormons thought that was hilarious, surprisingly.

Now he's an awesome Buddhist who is soon to be Dad and Teacher in Thailand. and I"m no longer married to his TBM Mom, so it ended happily ever after.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/22/2020 06:14PM by schrodingerscat.

ok

that's a great story

thoroughly enjoyed reading

he is on the right track, and the best results are at ZERO attendance !!!

If someone would invent an air gun that could load a single Cheerio from a bin on top of the gun, and fire it into the Mormon congregant's mouth, and a squirt gun for the water, deacons would fight for the chance to pass the sacrament.

Hilarity would ensue. :)

I have mixed emotions about this. Since this is a recovery board the longer the churches stay closed the more our position will be enhanced!
However if there is truly a public danger in reopening then I would have to side with not.
I take no sides. I am just throwing thoughts out there. I have seen everything from passive don't get involvd to violent crusader over this.
I hope that the powers that be will act rationally while trying to reach a solution.

thedesertrat1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have mixed emotions about this. Since this is a
> recovery board the longer the churches stay closed
> the more our position will be enhanced!
> However if there is truly a public danger in
> reopening then I would have to side with not.
> I take no sides. I am just throwing thoughts out
> there. I have seen everything from passive don't
> get involvd to violent crusader over this.
> I hope that the powers that be will act
> rationally while trying to reach a solution.

Well, there's that AND the silver lining that Natural Selection will take care of the Evangelicals and MORmONs if they all get together and leave it up to Jesus (or their Dear Leader) to save them.
Of course you better say good bye to your loved ones if you're >60.

Well as one who is slightly in the know, the upper hierarchy had a meeting yesterday or the day before, and regional reps had a meeting with the stake presidents and bishops yesterday of N. Utah. It was all discussed of the logistics of how it's going to be handled. And the gist is that they are reopening the churches and the rumor I heard is that they are going to stagger the attendance, so not everyone is going to come the same day. And members probably won't be passing the tray to each other as well. But it should all hit the news papers within a short time.

>But it should all hit the news papers within a short time.

Really?

It was in the papers 3 days ago

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2020/05/19/lds-church-unveils-plan/

https://www.heraldextra.com/news/local/faith/lds-first-presidency-announces-two-phased-approach-to-opening-church-meetings/article_5f9a7f6f-1f76-5e4b-8ad0-2b2d6b9c774a.html

macaRomney Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> not everyone is going to come the same day.

yah, uhhhhhh how is that going to work out ????

> And
> members probably won't be passing the tray to each
> other as well.

LDS inc and its MOReMONey church has a HUGE problem there, and however they attempt to solve it, HUGE negative implications remain whatever they do to attempt to resolve the troubled situation ......and watching them attempt to deal with their plight is immensely amusing and enjoyable !!!!

From experience gained because of this pandemic, we now know that virtual religious ceremonies ("Sunday services"), over the Internet, are possible.

The drawback for Christians would be that communion cannot, obviously, be a virtual experience--but everything else I am aware of can be done virtually.

I do not know if this is true of Muslim prayer services (five prayer services each day, according to Google), but it is absolutely true of Jewish services (technically: "three" daily prayer services where a minyan (a minimum of ten Jews) is "present"). [Important fact: in actuality, the "afternoon" and the "evening" services take place one right after another, so from an outsider's viewpoint, there would be just TWO daily Jewish prayer services: morning, and afternoon/evening.]

Since Mormon services, from what I have gathered, are more free form, according to my [admittedly limited ;) ] knowledge, there shouldn't be any real "theological" difficulties (at least any I can imagine) in the LDS church transitioning to Internet services as well.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/22/2020 07:47PM by Tevai.

Tevai Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> From experience gained because of this pandemic,
> we now know that virtual religious ceremonies
> ("Sunday services"), over the Internet, are
> possible.
>
> The drawback for Christians would be that
> communion cannot, obviously, be a virtual
> experience--but everything else I am aware of can
> be done virtually.
>
> I do not know if this is true of Muslim prayer
> services (five prayer services each day, according
> to Google), but it is absolutely true of Jewish
> services (technically: "three" daily prayer
> services where a minyan (a minimum of ten Jews) is
> "present").
>
> Since Mormon services, from what I have gathered,
> are more free form, according to my knowledge,
> there shouldn't be any real "theological"
> difficulties (at least any I can imagine) in the
> LDS church transitioning to Internet services as
> well.

Makes it hard to shake down members for donations when you can't corner them in the hall and schedule them for a "Tithing Settlement with the Bishop".

schrodingerscat Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Makes it hard to shake down members for donations
> when you can't corner them in the hall and
> schedule them for a "Tithing Settlement with the
> Bishop".

Absolutely true!

[Obviously, my nevermo ignorance is being outed!]

schrodingerscat Wrote:

> Makes it hard to shake down members for donations
> when you can't corner them in the hall and
> schedule them for a "Tithing Settlement with the
> Bishop".

perhaps the practical demise of LDS Inc, at least their MOReMONey grabbing ability via their MORmON scam church is well on the way

You have the option to not attend.

Happily, we have chairs that interlock and can separate, not pews.

We're rearranging the auditorium with little clusters of chairs: singles, doubles, quartets, a couple of five's and six's--each cluster six feet or more from another, also facing differently, or curved together, different angles, etc. Thus, family groups can find (or rearrange) a grouping to accommodate their number. My wife, daughter, and i will take a "three," The larger "H's" can put together a six or a seven, and so on.

Thus, on the presumption that family members have all shared each others' microbes, they can "keep to themselves" and minimize sharing with other members.

We're also learned that the virus is not as durable on surfaces as was first reported, so we don't have to worry about hymnals and bulletins and things.

Whether or not churches should be allowed to reopen is irrelevant to me. The only issue is whether I attend or not. My own church will hold restricted services next week. I likely will not be there.

Of course they should reopen. How else can they continue their plan to extort money from members?

I read an article on the topic of church reopening written by Roman Catholic priest Edward Beck, who is also a CNN contributor among many other activities. I've heard several interviews and discussions with Edward Beck and find him to be well spoken, interesting and engaging.

Beck recently wrote an article on the topic of reopening churches that I found to be level-headed and rational, not surprising coming from him. Some of his comments follow below.

The article is in response to the American president's recent call to reopen America's churches. Therefore, it is inevitably political by definition. In the excerpts below I have purposely not included any comments from the article that directly address the political aspects of this question. I seek rather to outline Beck's attitude and opinions about the question of reopening churches. The bottom line, with which I heartily agree, is that a person of faith can observe their beliefs without the need for physical gathering en masse in a specific location. In the COVID-related situation of church closures and the rising clamour to reopen, hopefully most people can agree that their faith is not dependent on a building or a ritual and that mass gatherings at this time are not safe. That alone should be their answer to the reopen-the-churches question, in my opinion.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/22/opinions/churches-reopening-trump-covid-19-beck/index.html

Excerpts:

“I am a Roman Catholic priest in the Passionist Community serving, at the moment, in New York. During this pandemic I have buried the dead at cemeteries — with limited family members present. I have prayed with people via FaceTime and Zoom. I even heard a confession in a supermarket parking lot.

“Priests with whom I live have blessed the sick and dying in hospitals and nursing homes. We have also celebrated virtual Masses and prayer services for countless of the faithful.

“The churches in my area have been open for individual prayer, Benediction services and Stations of the Cross, and social distancing is strongly encouraged. Priests have even paraded in processions in neighborhoods with the Blessed Sacrament in order to bring elements of the church service out to the faithful. Similarly, rabbis and imams whom I know have been doing the equivalent with their respective religious congregations. That is all "religious service."

“What most of us have not done is put ourselves and our parishioners in danger by gathering in large groups for Mass or other religious services "as usual." That would have been — and would continue to be, in this time of contagion — irresponsible and sinful. It would also violate the right to life of many. Yes, responsible action with regard to religious organizations during this pandemic is a right-to-life issue. This is a right that needs to apply to those who live after birth, too.

“…No one is prohibiting the free exercise of religion. Though we are in the teeth of a pandemic, in which a very dangerous coronavirus can be transmitted by, among other things, close physical proximity, people can and do continue to worship, albeit in temporarily altered circumstances and in novel ways. To use the "freedom of religion" argument to demand carte blanche the opening of religious venues is to proffer a fallacious argument that can potentially lead to physical harm and, in the worst case, death.

“We all want to be able to open churches and places of worship fully so that those who wish to gather in physical communion again can do so. However, this must be done incrementally and with utmost care. Physicians and health experts should be our primary guides here, and religious leaders should follow their guidance with strict and humble adherence.

“But let us take the time we need to get it right.”

-----

As the scripture (and the song) says: there is a time for everything.

...a time to weep and a time to laugh
a tme to mourn and a time to dance


This is a time to be rational.



Here is a brief bio of Edward Beck:

https://www.cnn.com/profiles/father-edward-beck-profile

“Father Edward Beck is a Roman Catholic priest and member of the Passionist Community, and serves as a CNN religion commentator.

“Ordained a priest in 1985, Father Beck has worked as a media contributor on issues of faith, religion, morality and ethics for over 10 years, contributing for ABC News, CBS News, Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, ABC Family Channel, HLN and Current TV. He co-hosted Focus on Faith with Chris Cuomo for ABC News.”

I like Father Beck's point of view. On the documentary that I saw last week about a week at Montifiore Hospital in the Bronx, they showed a neighborhood priest being driving around the neighborhood in the back of a truck, giving out blessings. I think it was very meaningful for the heavily Catholic neighborhood.

Hi summer. It's interesting to see how some religious leaders are changing up their usual practices to cope with the crisis. I'm always glad to see evidence that many are not super-rigid. I'm sure their people appreciate the innovations.

As a Protestant of a certain sort, I'm familiar with the idea that the church is the people, not the building. Therefore, you don't need the bricks and mortar to worship. To me, being a Christian doesn't mean having to show up in a church building at a designated time and place. I can see that many would be missing that gathering together but putting it on hold doesn't mean people can't still worship - just in a different way than many are accustomed to - such as just with immediate family (such as the home churches many favour, which have a biblical source). The right to hold your religious beliefs and the reality that you are the church - it's not a specific building somewhere - should hopefully inform our attitudes and choices in the face of even this daunting CV situation. I hope many people of faith can take comfort in this view of worship.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/23/2020 01:51PM by Nightingale.

There are views that it was politically driven based on the argument that religious support has eroded somewhat.

Yes, but not right away, and not all locations at the same time. When and how churches reopen should be based solely on the sciences and how well the fight against the coronavirus is going in their regions.

I am not too happy about this. A mega church, recently built and completed during the virus shutdown, is now having its first services this Sunday (tomorrow). We just passed the sign with the announcement this afternoon. I believe it holds a little over 1000 people at a time, perhaps more. It is less than a mile from our home and we can walk to it over an old golf course it bought a few years ago. It is an evangelical charismatic church with 'speaking in tongues' type worship. I attended one service years ago out of curiosity of this same church when it was at its old location. It is a disaster waiting to happen in my opinion. I hope I am wrong.

I don't care two hoots in hell if "the churches" re-open. It's the implication that I am somehow expected to attend that bothers me.

Talking to my out-of-state TBM sister, I say, “I bet you could get used to not going to church on Sundays”. She says “absolutely! I’m liking this!”