The opposite of this decision places Americans in direct conflict with their churches, not their faith. The decision to open churches is made by people that do not have the best interest of their parishioners. Sorry, they simply don't. Such a church can imperil the entire community and not just parishioners, as if that is okay, too.
People of faith don't have a problem transitioning to an "at home" expression. They don't have to display it to a congregation and neither do their faith leaders. If a person has sincere faith it is simply a matter of turning on an online source and participate in any religious ceremony carried out by the leadership of the church.
To believe divine intervention is better than warnings by health professionals and the government is not even faithful. That is arrogance. Humility is much needed by faith leaders that think they can outwit a very deadly virus through prayers in a building.
Religious leaders have become very inventive to keep their parishioners at the center of their prayers online and otherwise. It is easy to tithe without being inside the church building.
By Ian Milihiser
The Rev. Nicolas Sanchez (click here) Toledano poses among pews adorned with portraits of his parishioners at St. Patrick’s Catholic Church in the North Hollywood section of Los Angeles.
Late Friday night, (click here) the Supreme Court handed down a 5-4 decision establishing that states still have some power to regulate how many people are allowed to gather in churches during a deadly pandemic
The case, South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom, began on May 11, when a California church sought a lower court order allowing it to hold in-person services, despite a state order requiring places of worship to hold services online to avoid spreading the coronavirus. While the case was pending before the Supreme Court, however, California relaxed its order to allow such in-person services, so long as the number of attendees did not exceed 25 percent of the building capacity or 100 worshipers.
That relaxation did not put an end to the case, however. The church still sought a broad order exempting it from much of the state’s power to regulate public health....
