Scotus Ruling Win On Religious Services During COVID Lockdown Removes Obstacle Named Chief Justice Roberts

  • Thread starter Thread starter gam197
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I withdrew my topic since it was the same news source and info as yours. But I will add that we can all be thankful on this holiday that Amy Barrett was confirmed before the election! This is a blessing for all churches! I expect we will see many more good things from this Justice.
 
I think this was good decision by the Court. The specific restrictions announced by Cuomo were too strict and inflexible. What he should have done (and maybe he will now) is change the rule to allow any number to gather for worship provided certain social distancing measures can be taken. There are some huge Churches in New York that could easily seat much much more than 25 with lots of distance between people. If they did this, and required masks, and provided safe entry and exit procedures, there is no reason why attendance should be limited to 25 in a big Church. I will note that fire marshal restrictions on capacity have been in effect for decades, so reasonable restrictions are constitutional. This one just wasn’t reasonable. I hope a more reasonable one will come along.
 
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle said:
I will note that fire marshal restrictions on capacity have been in effect for decades, so reasonable restrictions are constitutional. This one just wasn’t reasonable. I hope a more reasonable one will come along.
Click to expand...
I agree with this 100%. I would also point out that Roberts dissented because he thought the issue moot, given that Cuomo had already agreed to relax some restrictions. My only concern is that I would not agree with giving churches a pass on otherwise neutral safety rules and regulations. Some of Gorsuch’s language in his concurrence is a bit concerning on that front.
 
TMC said:
My only concern is that I would not agree with giving churches a pass on otherwise neutral safety rules and regulations.
Click to expand...
From a Catholic perspective, this has never been a consideration. The Church supports the idea, for example, of Church buildings conforming to the appropriate codes and standards. What the Church seems to consistently oppose are regulations that apply to religious buildings / institutions but not to secular buildings and institutions.

The underlying assumption that is a root cause of the current issues is that despotic local and state leaders view religion as non-essential, and 1st amendment protections as mere suggestions they can set aside on their own authority.
 
The diocese I am in has very reasonable plan. In my parish, for example, there are three Sunday masses and the pews are marked where people can sit. All are required to wear masks and receive communion coming down the center aisle, sanitizing hands on the way. There are two live streamed masses for those who should not attend in person.
For those who attend mass in person, it is also streamed in the parish hall for anyone who wants to receive communion in person.
 
Yet some groups protested, refusing to keep their distance, marching against travel restrictions — as if measures that governments must impose for the good of their people constitute some kind of political assault on autonomy or personal freedom! Looking to the common good is much more than the sum of what is good for individuals. It means having a regard for all citizens and seeking to respond effectively to the needs of the least fortunate.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top