An Interim COVID Strategy That's Showing Results

At best attempts to invoke the US First Amendment to lift the restrictions placed on in-person worship via the courts have been slow and so far, not very effective. The attorney and YouTube commentator Robert Barnes has observed that there are several reasons for this, in particular that judges are also members of the credentialed class that is imposing lockdowns (and I would add often members of the local political machine). In addition, Barnes points out that as an appeals judge, even Amy Coney Barrett, the great conservative hope for the US Supreme Court, has ruled in favor of lockdowns and against churches in one First Amendment case.

But short of what we must hope is an eventual First Amendment resolution, the legal Achilles heel of nearly all lockdown regimes is that they are health department orders. On one hand, they aren't laws passed by legislatiures. Even now, there's an established consensus among sheriffs and police chiefs that law enforcement does not enforce health department orders, and even attempts by political authorities to force them to do so are contentious.

And attempts by health departments to obtain court injunctions against churches that violate health department orders by holding non-conforming worship services have been largely ineffective. The case of Andrew Wommack Ministries International in Colorado is an illustrative comedy of errors. The Liberty Counsel site provides the latest update. The state and county health departments brought requests for an injunction against the ministries in federal court,

Their motion requested that AWMI be held in contempt and prohibit future conferences.

The judge first denied the request to hold AWMI in contempt, stating the court had not issued an injunction against the ministry. However, the judge then stated she had authority to hear the defendants’ emergency motion under state law. Liberty Counsel argued that the court lacked jurisdiction to rule on state law because neither AWMI nor the defendants brought state law claims before the court. The defendants’ motion lacked any legal basis and it also violated many federal rules. Federal courts under Article III of the Constitution have limited jurisdiction. Such courts have no authority to reach outside the record and the legal claims to decide state law claims not before them.

The health departments' legal case was hampered by the fact that health department counsel appeared to have no experience in trying to enforce their orders via litigation. Among their newbie errors was that they tried to get the Wommack ministries declared in contempt of court when there was in fact no court order against them. Thus Wommack continues to hold its ministers' conference without interference.

If federal courts have been reluctant to rule in favor of churches on First Amendment grounds, local courts have been reluctant to rule against them, on the basis that the First Amendment issues are undecided. Although the Southern California Evangelical churches' cases are all in different local courts, the Grace Community Church case appears to be proceeding generally like those of Godspeak Calvary Chapel and Harvest Rock Church.

In the YouTube interview below, Pastor MacArthur gives a brief outline of the situation. Although LA County tried to cancel the contract that allowed the church to use its property for a parking lot, the judge would not allow this to happen until the First Amendment issues are resolved at trial. Health department fines are placed in escrew until the legal issues are resolved as well.

Beyond that, one of MacArthur's overall points has been that as churches continue to meet in oppositoin to political authorities' attempts to regulate liturgy and attendance, it attracts attention, and this in turn brings more people to church and also brings community support. A neighboring synagugue, for instance, as MacArthur explained, realized it wasn't using its own parking lot on Sundays, so it offered it to Grace Community Church for Sunday use, due to the county threat, now in abeyance, to prohibit church parking on county property.

While there have been exceptions -- North Valley Baptist was forced to surrender to its county health department, for instance -- it appears that having the fortitude to commit civil disobedince, combined with effective counsel, is proving to be an effective short-term strategy.

Whether MacArthur's optimism that this will go away by next year is justified is a different question.

Roman Catholic Diocese Of Brooklyn Sues NY Gov Cuomo

Up to now, the most visible Catholic opponent of COVID lockdowns has been San Francisco Abp Cordileone, but his resistance has been limited to public processions and verbal persuasion. Evangelical and Pentecostal Protestants have been more willing to sue. But yesterday, the Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn finally lost patience with moving goalposts and arbitrary limits on capacity:

The Diocese of Brooklyn is suing the state of New York over a new order that restricts some indoor Masses in New York City to just 10 people.

The diocese alleges that the new health restrictions by Gov. Andrew Cuomo, put in place in Queens and Brooklyn amid a new spike in the coronavirus, “arbitrarily reduce capacity” at churches which worked with public health officials earlier in the summer to reopen safely after the initial wave of the virus.

“If this latest executive order stands, parishioners won't be able to go to Mass this Sunday, even though the Diocese has done everything right to ensure safe conditions in its churches,” said the diocese’s attorney Randy Mastro.

. . . Earlier this week, Cuomo capped indoor religious services in Brooklyn and Queens at 10 people in the areas deemed most seriously affected by the virus, and at 25 people in some other areas.

. . . Brooklyn Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio said that churches in the diocese faithfully abided by new precautions including that Mass attendees wear masks and sit at least six feet apart.

“The executive orders this week have left us with no other option than to go to court,” DiMarzio stated on Thursday. The bishop called it “an insult” for the state “to once again penalize all those who have made the safe return to Church work.”

Tensions had also been building throughout the week with ultra-Orthosox Jewish groups in Queens and Orange County, NY

[A] grassroots group representing Ultra-Orthodox Jewish congregations has filed a federal lawsuit seeking to halt implementation of a new shutdown order issued against their communities by Gov. Andrew Cuomo.

. . . On Tuesday, Cuomo declared areas with high rates of testing positivity, including the Village of Kiryas Joel and the Town of Palm Tree in Orange County and ultra-Orthodox Jewish areas in Rockland, to be "red zones" subject to new shutdowns. Among the new restrictions were tight limitations on houses of worship: 25% capacity or 10 worshipers, whichever is less.

Other Jewish leaders accused Cuomo of bad faith dealing:

Gov. Andrew Cuomo told Jewish religious leaders that limiting houses of worship to 50 percent capacity was sufficient to beat back the coronavirus surge — only to announce tighter restrictions just hours later.

. . . Cuomo told the leaders that a strict limit on the number of people in synagogues and other houses of worship was necessary, but indicated that it would be set at 50 percent.

. . . But in a 3 p.m. Tuesday press briefing, Cuomo unveiled a new, color-coded system of restrictions set to take effect no later than Friday — including capacity limits on religious institutions well below 50 percent.

In “intense cluster” zones, houses of worship are restricted to 25-percent capacity or a maximum of 10 people.

The ultra-Orthodox communities clearly feel that Jews are being singled out for special treatment, especially as the new controls go into place during high holidays. According to the Times of Israel,

Speaking in separate and overlapping press conferences Wednesday morning, Cuomo, New York’s governor, and de Blasio, New York City’s mayor, both avoided singling out the Jewish community or even using the word “Jewish.”

De Blasio has been criticized in the past for singling out New York Jews who violated regulations, and yesterday, Orthodox leaders accused Cuomo of misleading them regarding the scope of the new regulations. Cuomo also faced backlash on Monday for showing a 14-year-old picture of an Orthodox Jewish event while criticizing recent mass religious gatherings.

The problem I see is the conundrum posed by the non-conforming Evangelical megachurches in Southern California. They claim, and as far as I can see, haven't been challenged, that although they gather in thousands without masks or social distancing, and they sing in church, COVID illnesses and hospitalizations have been minimal -- it would appear well below regional statistics.

This suggests that the causes of COVID infections are traceable to factors other than church attendance. In areas like Brooklyn and Queens, central heating and ventilating systems in apartment buidlings are probably a more likely culprit.

The difficulty with lifting lockdown orders has been that they're based on a sort of adventitious reality sustained by media, health officials, and politicians, with a constantly shifting set of justifications for an oddly uniform set of policies. Masks may or may not be effective, but an increasing "consensus" says everyone must wear them.

If deaths and hospitalizations have remained at a low level, we must focus on "cases" even though nobody can explain exactly what a "case" is -- it may be asymptomatic, it may be a false positive, it may reflect antibodies to other viruses, but it justifies renewed lockdowns.

It's going to take a lot to get the world out of this.

More COVID

Churches continue to bring US First Amendment suits against state and local authorities on the basis of natural rights to freedom of assembly, freedom of speech, and free exercise of religion.

Andrew Wommack Ministries in Colorado is in a battle with local authorities who seek to limit attendance at a ministers' conference:

Andrew Wommack Ministries planned to host an in-person ministers' conference expected to draw hundreds of attendees. The group has tried several times since early last week to get exemptions from statewide health orders that limit crowd sizes during the pandemic. Those efforts have all been denied.

In a request filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court of Colorado, health officials with the state and Teller County said the group has gone ahead with the event anyway.

Liberty Counsel represents Wommack. It comments,

The ministers’ conference is ongoing on despite the Colorado government’s threats. To be threatened with criminal charges and fines is a serious matter. I believe we will win this battle, but it may take longer than we hoped. In the meantime, I want to ask for your prayers and support.

As I said earlier, this case is far from over. Despite the lack of an emergency injunction, our appeal on behalf of AWMI remains pending and we look forward to presenting a full argument before the court soon.

Liberty Counsel makes the point that county authorities limit attendance at religious gatherings to 175 with social distance, but they allow casinos in the couhty to operate so that

anyone can sit side-by-side at any number of slot machines and gamble 24 hours a day, seven days a week. There is no social distancing or sanitizing the gambling machines that are touched frequently by everyone.

The case is moving through the federal appeals process.

An SSPX priest, Fr Trevor Burfitt, is suing Califonria officials for violations of First Amendment rights:

Attorneys from the Thomas More Society have filed a lawsuit in California Superior Court against [California Gov] Newsom and 19 other state, county, and municipal officials on behalf of Father Trevor Burfitt. Submitted on September 29, 2020, the case charges each of the named parties with eight distinct violations of Burfitt’s rights under the Constitution of California.

The US Department of Justice has filed a Statement of interest

in the case filed by Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington, D.C., against the District of Columbia and Mayor Muriel Bowser. The 853-member church has a strong religious conviction that it must meet weekly and in person, as a single body, for worship. As a result of Mayor Bowser’s onerous COVID-19 orders (first capping worship services at 10 people and now 100), Capitol Hill Baptist Church (CHBC) has not been able to meet together in the District since March. As a temporary measure, they’ve been meeting in a field in Virginia.

. . . The statement of interest is part of Attorney General William P. Barr’s initiative, announced April 27, directing the DOJ to “review governmental policies around the country to ensure that civil liberties are protected during the COVID-19 pandemic.”

On the other hand, in what I think is a retrograde step, the Roman Catholic Diocese of Green Bay, WI reissued a dispensation from attending mass due to increasing COVID "cases" in its area. All Wisconsin bishops had previously agreed to lift the dispensation during September.

The COVID crisis increasingly appears to be an episode of public hysteria, fostered initially by legitimate concerns about the potential impact of an unknown new virus. Almost immediately, politicians and media continued to create an impression that there would be plague--like consequences unless the public consented to unprecedented and draconian measures.

Legal remedies have been slow and largely ineffective so far. A much greater effect will occur as the public at large begins to realize that the actual impact of the virus has been wildly exaggerated. That the US president, age 74, would contract the virus and fairly clearly recover after what was effectively a weekend of bed rest and plenty of fluids, should help to reshape the public impression.

Statements from Catholic bishops either lifting the dispensatoin or simply urging a return to mass are what's needed here, not vacillation over statistical chatter.

Allowing for Pastor MacArthur's knee-jeerk radical Protestantism, his overall message in the video below is what's needed now.

Cardinal Becciu: The Plot Thickens

I was only mildly interested in the announcement of Cardinal Becciu's sudden firing by Pope Francis on September 26:

Over a career spanning decades in the Roman Catholic Church, Cardinal Becciu had become a heavyweight in the Vatican hierarchy, described by one Vatican observer as the “finest, most informed and attentive diplomat working inside the Holy See.” His most recent position was head of the Vatican department that creates saints.

But he also emerged in recent years as a major character in conspiracies about alleged attempts to undercut financial reforms promoted by Cardinal George Pell, who headed the Vatican’s economic arm until he had to return to Australia to face accusations of sexual abuse.

Reports suggest that Becciu's record of corruption and embezzlement is long, but more recently they focus on Cardinal Pell:

The year is 2015. Pell, working as Prefect of the Secretariat for the Economy, finds “vast sums of undeclared money … hidden in various bank accounts by organizations and groups within the Holy See in Rome.”

The same year, Libero Milone is hired as Auditor General by Pope Francis to try to sort out what’s going on behind the financial scenes in Rome. He then suddenly resigns, without explanation. He later discloses that he was charged with espionage and embezzlement, and that his resignation was forced under threat of imprisonment by the Vatican police.

In 2017, Pell is suddenly confronted with allegations of sexual abuse in his homeland of Australia — allegations that are decades old. He winds up on trial, and is convicted with zero evidence or corroborating witness testimony, and spends the next 13 months in prison for a crime nobody could hope to prove he committed – and for which, he was later acquitted on appeal.

The Catholic News Agency has been cautious in reporting on these developments.

In reporting over several years, CNA has uncovered a set of Vatican financial scandals with connections to Becciu, and endeavored to do so with painstaking attention to available documentary proof. Within that coverage has been reporting about conflict between Becciu and Pell. And there have long been rumors and speculation among supporters of Pell that the cardinal was set up in Australia because of his involvement in Vatican affairs.

The reports emerging this weekend have attracted interest in part because they seem to confirm that speculation, and because Becciu’s role in financial scandals is now sufficiently enough established that he has been severely censured by Pope Francis. But the apparent confirmation of rumors and speculation does not by itself lend credibility to the allegations.

Abp Viganò comments:

Much has been written in recent days about yet another Vatican scandal this time involving Cardinal Becciu, Prefect of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints. Faced with accusations that still have to be proven, Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s response seemed to be dictated more by anger than by love of truth, more by a delusion of omnipotence than by the will for justice – in any case by a serious despotic abuse of authority.

From this point of view, we can now believe that the deprivation of the Sacred Purple and the reduction to the lay state have become summary executions, with a very strong media impact in favor of the image of those who inflict them, beyond the real moral and criminal responsibilities of the condemned. Mr. McCarrick, accused of very serious crimes, was directly condemned by the Pope, without the trial documents and testimonies concerning him being made public. With this ploy Bergoglio wanted to give an image of himself that however contrasts with the reality of the facts, since his stated desire to “clean up” the Vatican does not correspond to the fact of his having surrounded himself with widely compromised characters – to begin precisely by McCarrick – giving them official assignments, then kicking them out as soon as their scandals were exposed. And on all of them, as those who work in the Curia know well, already weighed serious suspicions, if not even any detailed evidence of guilt.

Well, I suppose this is Rome. Back in the day, cardinals were strangled. As Bp Barron says, we've been here before. As CNA suggests, we may hear more, or we may not.

What's Next In Michigan?

As far as I can tell from thousands of miles away, the COVID situation in Michigan was chaotic even before the state supreme court declared Gov Whitmer's executive orders unconstitutional last Friday. Karl Manke, the Owosso barber, had already defied the orders and effectively prevailed. Local law enforcerment had already refused to enforce them. In any case, the regime varied by region, and in turn, regions were subject to red light-green light orders at the governor's whim.

In the wake of last Friday's decision, Gov Whitmer insisted her orders were still in effect, while the state attorney general refused to enforce them. Yesterday, the state health department issued new and essentially equivalnt orders under different authority:

This order reinstates three aspects of Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s previous emergency orders:

• Masks are required at indoor and outdoor gatherings that involve people from different households.
• Specific gathering limitations.
• Bars must close indoor common areas, and indoor gatherings are prohibited in most areas where alcohol is sold.

This order is effective immediately and remains in effect through Oct. 30, according to MDHHS officials.

It remains to be seen whether any agency will enforce these new oirders, or whether they are enforceable in this fluid environment. So as far as I can see, little has actually changed.

Nevertheless, I went looking for current policies in Michigan Roman Catholic dioceses to see how they might be responding. It's not surprising that their responses differ.

The most surprising is the Diocese of Saginaw, which actually lifted the dispensation from attending mass as of Oct 1, even before the state supreme court decision. The bishop writes,

As you know, as public Masses in our diocese resumed in May, the dispensation from the obligation to attend Sunday Mass remained in place until Sept. 30. Now that the State of Michigan has opened up a great deal, I believe that it is appropriate to lift this dispensation.

On October 1, I reinstated the obligation to attend Mass. In doing so, I am asking Catholics to, guided by Jesus and a well-formed conscience, prayerfully make their own decision about whether to attend Mass or keep the Sabbath holy from home.

. . . There may be many reasons for not attending weekly Mass as obliged by the Church, and I want to make clear that I continue to encourage all people who are sick in any way, who are fearful of contracting COVID-19 or have concerns about underlying health issues and may be vulnerable to the disease to remain home. It would not be a sin to do so.

This strikes me as a model policy that could be followed in many other dioceses in states where the COVID regime is relatively light. It suggests Catholics can, with a well-formed conscience, actually think for themselves.

In an October 5 letter to the Diocese of Grand Rapids, the bishop writes,

It is good that more of you will now be able to attend Mass. I also realize, however, that by maintaining proper social distancing, our churches still face some occupancy restrictions. I am extending the dispensation for all Catholics within the territory of the Diocese of Grand Rapids from their obligation of attending Sunday Mass through November 23 to address this concern.

, , , Those who are able to attend Mass should return, remembering that our physical presence at the Eucharistic table is irreplaceable. While this dispensation is in effect, all baptized Catholics are reminded of their obligation to keep the Lord’s Day holy.

The Diocese of Gaylord posted the following on its website on Oct 3, following the supreme court decision:

We are aware of the recent decision of the Michigan Supreme Court regarding the emergency powers of Governor Gretchen Whitmer.

The current safety precautions and protocols for schools and parishes that have been issued by the diocese are issued based on the authority of the Bishop, taking into account expert advice from the medical community. Therefore, these safety precautions and protocols are not affected by this decision of the Supreme Court regarding the authority of the Governor and remain in place until they are reviewed and, if appropriate, modified by the diocese.

Your cooperation and compliance in this regard is deeply appreciated.

What's consistent among these is that none acknowledges state authority to limit mass attendance. On one hand, two of the bishops refer to the ability of individual Catholics to decide whether to attend mass, given public health conditions. A third asserts that the conditions under which mass is held are determined by the bishop, not the state.

Under current circumstnaces, the state is in any case not in a position to issue, relax, or enforce consistent public health guidelines, and the bishops are indirectly acknowledging this. This strikes me as a remarkably intelligent response to the conditions they have, and I suspect many other dioceses will be looking to them as the situation develops.

California Update

Pastor John MacArthur of Grace Community Church has emerged as the best-spoken of the leaders among the Southern California Evangelical parishes defying health department orders against indoor worship and singing in church, and mandating cocial distancing.

This YouTube video encapsulates the present status as he sees it. Keep in mind that MacArthur, although his interests do parallel most Christian denominations, is a radical Protestant who in fact does not believe Catholics are even Christian, and he has nice things to say here about Luther and Calvin.

He continues to raise an intriguing question -- of the thousanbds who come to worship each week at the non-conforming Evangelical parishes, there have apparently been very few cases, and no deaths, reported, and apparently very few with any symptoms. This suggests that empirically, going to church, even singing, exchanging the peace, and not social-distancing, is not high-risk activity.

The unspoken context of some remarks by our pastor in yesterday's homily bear this out to some extent -- he seems uncomfortable with the idea of continually extending the dispensation from attending mass. Going to mass is good for people, and it's unfortunate that bishops are allowing people to lose a habit of virtue.

He endorsed an event scheduled for this comming Saturday in Los Angeles, the March for Faith. Unlike the Free the Mass procession in San Francisco last month, this event is non-denominational and explicitly non-partisan;

March for Faith does not endorse political parties or candidates. We promote First Amendment religious freedom for all Americans. All are welcome to attend this peaceful protest.

Please stick with non-partisan hats or clothing to express your patriotism, love of our Constitution, and respect for the law. Please no Trump or Biden signs, hats, T-shirts or other campaign paraphernalia. You are welcome to carry American flags, prayer books, rosaries or other small devotional items.

In the spirit of maintaining a peaceful event, we ask you to stay on city sidewalks and public property and observe all state and local laws on social distancing and personal safety.

The March for Life in San Francisco did result in a loosening of restrictions in that city, which had previously limited mass attendance to 12 people including celebrant and cantor, outdoors only. According to the archdiocese, on September 29,

Today, Mayor Breed announced that San Francisco will set the limit for religious worship up to the extent permitted by state health regulations. Archbishop Cordileone responds:

“I want to thank Mayor London Breed for recognizing that faith is essential. As well, I want to thank the thousands of San Francisco Catholics and others who joined the processions, the more than 35,000 who signed the petition at benedictinstitute.org/liftunfairrestrictions, came to St. Mary Cathedral’s outdoor plaza to witness to our faith, wrote letters to the editor or op-eds, and who generally spoke up with one united voice under the banner: We are essential! Free the Mass!

. . . “Our petition effort, though, is not ended. The state of California’s limit of no more than 100 people inside of a house of worship regardless of the size of the building is still unjust. We want and we intend to worship God safely: with masks, social distancing, sanitation, ventilation, and other such safety protocols. But we will not accept believers being treated more severely than other, comparable secular activities.

“This movement is not over. Our work and victories have just begun. Thank you San Francisco people of faith and the thousands of others across the nation who are joining us at benedictinstitute.org/liftunfairrestrictions.”

Los Angeles and Ventura Counties continue to require worship services to be outdoors-only, with no singing, masks, and social distancing. (Ushers at our parish monitor the procesion for communion to be sure people observe the six-foot demarcations taped on the pavement.)

A post on the Liberty Counsel site provides an update on the lawsuit filed on behalf of the Harvest Rock Church in Pasadena:

The lawsuit challenges both the total ban on in-person worship (including in private homes) in the counties on the “County Monitoring List,” and the ban on singing and chanting in the remaining counties. In addition to in-person worship at Harvest Rock Church, the church also has many “Life Groups,” which are home Bible studies and fellowship groups. These too are prohibited under Gov. Newsom’s July 6 (no singing and chanting) and July 13 (no worship) orders. Yet while he discriminates against churches, home Bible studies and fellowship meetings, the governor continues to encourage thousands of protestors to gather throughout the state. Like Gov. Newsom, Pasadena has allowed hundreds and thousands of protestors. Neither the Pasadena Public Health Department nor the Pasadena Prosecutor have attempted to stop the protests in which people are crowded together, many of them not wearing masks.

While California weather continues to allow outdoor worship for now, this won't continue indefinitely, and it doesn't appear that authorities will modify their orders once rain and cooler temperatures make outdoor worship problematic.

COVID Update

The best news since my last post on this subject came yesterday, when the Michigan supreme court ruled Gov Whitmer had no authority to extend emergency lockdown orders past April 30.

The governor does not have authority under either of the state’s emergency statutes to continue the coronavirus state of emergency, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled in questions related to a federal case on Friday.

Two laws -- the Emergency Management Act from 1976 and the Emergency Powers of the Governor Act from 1945 -- govern how states of emergency are declared and handled in Michigan.

Neither, the court found, gave Gov. Gretchen Whitmer the authority to continue declaring states of emergency or issuing unilateral orders under them past April 30, when her initial declaration would have expired.

However, it appears there will still be local battles at the county and municipal level, as there were in Wisconsin.

A State Supreme Court ruling that says Gov. Gretchen Whitmer overstepped her bounds in the fight against COVID-19 doesn’t sit well with Ingham County’s top health officer.

Linda Vail told News 10 the court’s ruling that appears to void Whitmer’s executive orders made past April 30 could cause chaos for health departments throughout the state.

“I’m still really in shock in terms of what (the ruling) means from a public health perspective,” Vail said.

No matter what the fallout is from the court’s ruling, Vail said she will continue to enforce Ingham County orders that limit capacity at bars and restaurants.

Mississippi and Florida have loosened some mask restrictions, but other restrictions remain in place. It appears that Florida Catholic dioceses have generally reopened mass since May, though they still require masks, and they haven't lifted the dispensation from attending mass.

In Pennsylvania,

The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Thursday that the Wolf administration’s coronavirus mitigation gathering limits -- 250 people at outdoor events and 25 at indoor ones -- are back in play again while the appeal process works itself through the court system. The news comes after U.S. District Judge William Stickman IV said in mid-September that the gathering limits were unconstitutional.

This Youube gives the current status of the case for Godspeak Calvary Chapel in Newbury Park, CA

It appears that its situation is very similar to that of Grace Community Church in Los Angeles, where both are technically "in contempt", but the judges are suspending penalities until the cases are tried sometime next year. Both judges see constitutional issues, and my guess is that both see the current legal environment as very fluid, as yesterday's Michigan decision illustrates.

However, not all the news on this front is good. For Harvest Rock Church in Pasadena, Liberty Counsel reports,

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a 2-1 decision in a case brought by Liberty Counsel on behalf of Harvest Rock Church and Harvest International Ministry denying an emergency injunction pending appeal against California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s unconstitutional orders. The Court of Appeals heard oral argument on September 21.

Judges Rawlison and Christen issued a short four-page order, and Judge O'Scannlain issued a 15-page dissent. O’Scannlon would have granted the emergency injunction pending appeal. Tomorrow, Liberty Counsel will file its brief on the merits of the request for an injunction which the Court of Appeals will set for another date once briefing is complete. Today’s ruling was only on the emergency injunction pending appeal and the Court will later hear arguments on the merits of the case requesting a preliminary injunction.

Worse, North Valley Baptist Church in Santa Clara, CA surrendered to county health department demands in the face of mounting fines and ceased indoor services:

In a video posted earlier this month, [Pastor Jack] Trieber complained that the church now owed the county an astonishing $52,750, according to a bill he showed on camera — and there would be more to come if the church kept refusing to accept the reality of the virus.

. . . Officials kept adding to their ever-growing list, sometimes issuing multiple five-thousand-dollar fines in a single day due to the church’s multiple services.

And now, only after the bill sits at $112,750 — which the county says the church must pay — has Trieber finally caved.

The overall situation seems more fluid, with different states having increasingly divergent COVID regimes. It remains to be seen how Catholic dioceses will respond to the Michigan decision, though the exmple of Wisconsin suggests it will take them some months to lift the dispensation on mass attendance, and dioceses in other states with generally loose restrictions still haven't lifted the dispensation.

And California, while gradually loosening restrictions on indoor malls, nail salons, and other businesses, still hasn't allowd churches to hold indoor services in most counties.