Saturday, August 1, 2020

California COVID Church Restriction Followup

As I've said, I don't think it's realistic to expect any court decision to be a magic bullet that relieves restrictions on houses of worship. The restrictions vary greatly -- I was surprised to see Pennsylvania allowing 75% capacity, while Michigan in some areas limits attendance to 10, while most of California bans all indoor public masses. For that matter, LA County keeps threatening a red light-green light switch, depending apparently on what the health director had for breakfast.

To follow up on Grace Community Church's defiance of Gov Newsom's July 13 order,

Last week, John MacArthur and Grace Community Church, which is located in Sun Valley California, announced they would not be adhering to California Governor Gavin Newsom’s second round of closure orders. In his announcement, “Christ, not Caesar, Is Head of the Church”, MacArthur informed civic leaders that they had exceeded their legitimate jurisdiction, and that “faithfulness to Christ prohibits us from the restrictions they want to impose on our corporate worship services.”

On Sunday, July 26, 2020 Grace Community Church had its doors open for worship. The pews were filled with people, most of whom were not wearing masks. They sang songs (which is currently banned in indoor spaces in most of California) , and listened to their Pastor John MacArthur preach a sermon that reiterated statements he made previously that week in the announcement.

Photos on the web show a full house with no masks and no social distancing. So far, LA County is just making vague threats of enforcement:
Speaking to reporters in an online news briefing on Thursday, the county's public health officer stressed that large gatherings are generally barred under coronavirus health orders, but there are exceptions allowing outdoor church services and political protests -- as long as attendees wear face coverings and practice social distancing.

"Unfortunately we've heard reports of some faith organizations operating outside of those health and safety requirements,'' Dr. Muntu Davis said. "From a health and safety perspective this is of great concern given the large number of COVID-19 cases that continue to be diagnosed in Los Angeles County. I want to express my gratitude to those organizations that are adhering to the health officer order and who have found ways to worship that do not put the wider community and their congregation at risk."

The situation in San Francisco is worse. According to Abp Cordileone,
. . . I have spoken of how we want to be partners with the City in caring for our people – not just for their physical and financial health, but mental and spiritual health as well – emphasizing, too, the many different ways in which we have been supporting our local government in the effort to stem the spread of the virus and come to the aid of those in need. With regard to local health orders in San Francisco for reopening for public activities, I have pointed out the two separate considerations of indoor and outdoor services, comparing us to similar (or even identical) secular activities.
  1. The City had been allowing indoor retail at 50% capacity, but not allowed any indoor religious services at all. The concern here from the perspective of health experts is that in a retail store, people enter to make a purchase and then leave, without spending much time indoors; it is much riskier for a group of people to spend an extended period of time inside the same space. However, at larger retail outlets it is quite possible for people to spend an hour or more in the store, while we can keep our services to under an hour; moreover, the employees in the store are indoors continuously for many hours at a time. In addition, a church can be a much safer place than a retail store, because it is a more controlled environment: the people are stationary; we can insure social distancing; we can insure that people are wearing face coverings; we can keep the doors open to allow air flow; we can sanitize high touch areas between services.
  2. With regard to outdoor services, you are all well aware that pre-planned and scheduled street protests have been allowed to continue unhindered, while the limit of no more than 12 people still applies to everyone else, including us. Yet here again, an outdoor worship service is a much safer event than a protest, since the people are stationary, social distance is respected, and the participants are wearing masks.
Unfortunately, despite all of these efforts and explanations, and despite hearing words of approval for our Archdiocesan safety plan that was submitted to the City’s Recovery Task Force, there has been no change in the health order in San Francisco. Indeed, with counties now going on the state’s watch list and health orders changing rapidly, it is sometimes difficult to keep track of it all. This is what resulted in the confusion that led to the City Attorney sending inspectors to conduct surveillance in our churches.
There isn't going to be a single remedy that fixes any of this. I certainly agree with Catholic priests who see a social-engineering agenda behind all the "health" restrictions, but they limit natural rights beyond just freedom of worship. Strategies that may apply to independent Evangelical groups, even very large ones, won't work for Catholic dioceses, where, for instance, Abp Cordileone stresses a wish to cooperate with civil authorities.

One partial solution may come with the November elections. So far, there are absolutely no bumper stickers or lawn signs in LA, which is pretty unusual for this time in a presidential election year. On the other hand, my wife yesterday saw a hand-lettered sign in a car's rear window that said simply, ENOUGH.