Attending places of worship post restrictions

[MattA7]

As restrictions have been abolished in England today Muslims will be able to celebrate Eid normally and mosques will be able to be at normal capacity. So I guess good timing.

 

[island]

My priest who has always been on the relaxed side abruptly announced yesterday that face coverings will still be required indefinitely in the church.

I might look to see if it’s better in a neighbouring parish.

 

[35B]

My priest who has always been on the relaxed side abruptly announced yesterday that face coverings will still be required indefinitely in the church.

I might look to see if it’s better in a neighbouring parish.

We have the first choral evensong involving full choir this evening - there will be no distancing in the choir stalls. I'll be interested to see what things are like in the congregation - as a PCC member, I've not yet seen the CofE guidance that the rector and wardens will be implementing, and I know views vary considerably within the congregation.

 

[30907]

We have the first choral evensong involving full choir this evening - there will be no distancing in the choir stalls. I'll be interested to see what things are like in the congregation - as a PCC member, I've not yet seen the CofE guidance that the rector and wardens will be implementing, and I know views vary considerably within the congregation.

Happy reading. But remember this is version 1.0 and HMG is known for issuing guidance late in the day (or after the due date!).
https://www.churchofengland.org/resources/coronavirus-covid-19-guidance#na
(I am not active as a clergyperson ATM so haven't digested it....)

 

[Doctor Fegg]

We have the first choral evensong involving full choir this evening - there will be no distancing in the choir stalls. I'll be interested to see what things are like in the congregation - as a PCC member, I've not yet seen the CofE guidance that the rector and wardens will be implementing, and I know views vary considerably within the congregation.

Every time our choir has rehearsed a particular set of canticles for Evensong (Sumsion in A, as it happens) there's been another lockdown. I'm starting to think we've jinxed it.

 

[35B]

Every time our choir has rehearsed a particular set of canticles for Evensong (Sumsion in A, as it happens) there's been another lockdown. I'm starting to think we've jinxed it.

They sang that yesterday. As they're doing Howells Coll Reg, with "I Was Glad" as the anthem, and my son's got the solo in the Nunc, I'm hoping otherwise.

Happy reading. But remember this is version 1.0 and HMG is known for issuing guidance late in the day (or after the due date!).
https://www.churchofengland.org/resources/coronavirus-covid-19-guidance#na
(I am not active as a clergyperson ATM so haven't digested it....)

Thanks for the link - usefully content light

 

[initiation]

As they're doing Howells Coll Reg

Great setting.

I sang my first evensong since last March last night. They have done a couple previously but i've not been on the rota. Hopefully in September can get back into the swing of things (and recuit some trebles to replace the ones who have left over the last 16 months).

 

[MattA7]

It was good to hear a lot of mosques in England are holding Eid prayers at normal capacity. No social distancing and masks optional.

 

[duncanp]

It was good to hear a lot of mosques in England are holding Eid prayers at normal capacity. No social distancing and masks optional.

..whereas a church I used to go to when I lived in London, and still keep in contact withhas issued , following:-

Masks will still be required in church, as social distancing has been further reduced; (as Chris Whitty has pointed out "we wear masks for other people, not for ourselves"), unless exempt

Singing will commence; all people will be required to wear a mask when singing until further notice unless exempt

Masks while singing hymns????

I can't imagine that would be very comfortable, especially if the hymn is lively.

 

[initiation]

Masks while singing hymns????

I can't imagine that would be very comfortable, especially if the hymn is lively.

For period of time before Christmas our choir was made to wear masks while actually singing. It was bloody awful and thankfully has not made a return.

 

[35B]

..whereas a church I used to go to when I lived in London, and still keep in contact withhas issued , following:-


Masks while singing hymns????

I can't imagine that would be very comfortable, especially if the hymn is lively.

I attended a service yesterday; members of the congregation were asked to follow pre-Sunday protocols which some did and others didn't. The choir sang unmasked (never seen the stalls so overflowing!), the congregation joined in the hymns. I had no difficulty in singing the hymn while wearing my mask.

 

[30907]

For period of time before Christmas our choir was made to wear masks while actually singing. It was bloody awful and thankfully has not made a return.

Having tried it (in in open sided marquee with a secular choir)
1. it doesn't impact the sound quality (logical, I suppose).
2. my ordinary cloth mask was occasionally awkward when breathing in - people with slightly more sophisticated "choir" ones weren't bothered.
3. we managed all the choruses of Messiah without difficulty.

 

[AY1975]

I attended a service yesterday; members of the congregation were asked to follow pre-Sunday protocols which some did and others didn't. The choir sang unmasked (never seen the stalls so overflowing!), the congregation joined in the hymns. I had no difficulty in singing the hymn while wearing my mask.

I attended my church in person this morning, for only the third time this year. Otherwise I have mostly been "attending" on Zoom from home since the start of the pandemic.

Until the latest easing of restrictions on 19th July, my church required worshippers to pre-book to attend services in person. Pre-booking is no longer required, but they still hold only either the morning or the evening service in church on alternate Sundays (i.e. morning service one Sunday, evening service the next) but both services are still streamed on Zoom whether they are also held in person in church or not.

They also still ask you to wear a mask and respect the wishes of people who do not wish to sit close to anyone from outside their household or bubble. Most of the Covid measures remain in place, such as having the order of service on a screen instead of giving out service booklets, waving at each other instead of shaking hands to exchange the sign of the peace, asking people to sanitise their hands on arrival and before receiving communion, and only offering communion in one kind (and distributing it at arm's length). They also ask you to take your communion wafer back to your pew before eating it.

Until the latest easing of restrictions, the congregation were asked not to sing the hymns, but you can now sing with your mask on.

There were about 40 people at my church today, whereas I think before the latest easing of restrictions when pre-booking was required it was a maximum of 30, and before the pandemic we usually had between 100 and 130 (and occasionally up to 150) at our morning service. I think they want to make the streaming of services on Zoom a permanent thing, as some members of our congregation, especially many elderly and disabled people, have come to prefer it to attending in person. My church even has a phone line to enable people to join in by phone if they don't use the internet (which my parents now make use of most Sundays).

Although many of the Covid precautions are common to most or all churches, practice does vary from church to church to some extent. For example at my church (i.e. the one I usually attend, which is the other side of town from where I live) they give out communion in front of the altar rails, whereas at another church that I visited recently they brought it to you in your seat. And at my local parish church where I attended at Christmas and Easter, they did actually offer communion in both kinds but using individual cups (probably borrowed from the local Methodist church, which I don't think has been holding any services since the start of the pandemic). The celebrant would consecrate the one chalice, then pour the wine through a funnel into the smaller cups.

 

[tspaul26]

I was fortunate in that I was able to assist at the altar as an inferior minister throughout most of the depths of lockdown.

As far as I can tell, numbers of congregants at my parish church are back to or higher than levels seen before the pandemic hit. Indeed, additional public Masses have been celebrated on Sunday mornings in order to accommodate the number of adherents.

As for this suggestion:

Regarding the shared chalice, it should be possible to replace this with small individual vessels into which the wine is poured.

https://charlesfarris.co.uk/catalog/non-conformist-communion gives some examples of what is possible, and I think the mainstream churches (CofE and Roman Catholic) should show some flexibility in changing their rules to adapt to the post COVID world.

Or if everyone bought an egg cup from home, they could have their own vessel from which to drink the wine, without any risk of cross contamination.

1. Pouring of the consecrated specie into multiple vessels is expressly forbidden due to the risk of profanation.
2. The chalice is supposed to be made of precious metal or at least gilt inside so eggcups from home are not exactly ‘meet and right’. Pottery vessels are expressly forbidden due to the risk of breakage and profanation.
3. Self-communication by the laity is not permitted - this is a sacrament, not a buffet.
4. Administration of the Eucharist under both species is not required in any event.
5. If it is desired to administer under both species, intinction is available whereby the Host is partially immersed in the chalice.
6. Regardless, it is not obligatory to receive the Eucharist more than once per annum during Eastertide.

The Church has survived plagues and pestilence without meddling of this sort in the past - she will do so again.

EDIT: the six points above pertain specifically to the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church, in case that was not sufficiently clear from the parts of the quoted passage shown in bold.

 

[duncanp]

I was fortunate in that I was able to assist at the altar as an inferior minister throughout most of the depths of lockdown.

As far as I can tell, numbers of congregants at my parish church are back to or higher than levels seen before the pandemic hit. Indeed, additional public Masses have been celebrated on Sunday mornings in order to accommodate the number of adherents.

As for this suggestion:

1. Pouring of the consecrated specie into multiple vessels is expressly forbidden due to the risk of profanation.
2. The chalice is supposed to be made of precious metal or at least gilt inside so eggcups from home are not exactly ‘meet and right’. Pottery vessels are expressly forbidden due to the risk of breakage and profanation.
3. Self-communication by the laity is not permitted - this is a sacrament, not a buffet.
4. Administration of the Eucharist under both species is not required in any event.
5. If it is desired to administer under both species, intinction is available whereby the Host is partially immersed in the chalice.
6. Regardless, it is not obligatory to receive the Eucharist more than once per annum during Eastertide.

The Church has survived plagues and pestilence without meddling of this sort in the past - she will do so again.

But several nonconformist denominations, such as the Baptists and Methodists, use specially made individual cups into which wine is poured.

I think that this is just as valid a method of receiving wine at holy communion as intinction and use of the common chalice.

All of the "rules" that you quote are man made, and are based on human interpretation of what Christ himself meant when he said "Do this, in remembrance of me" at the last supper.

Who, for example, says that "self communication by the laity" is not permitted? If there is a reference to this in the Bible, I would be interested to know where it is. Nonconformist denominations believe in the "priesthood of all believers", and that consequently anyone is able to administer the sacraments.

There is a shortage of clergy, particularly in the Roman Catholic church and the Church of England.

As Holy Communion is still important to many Christians, churches need to adapt the rules and procedures for adminstering it, both to cope with the shortage of clergy, and to adapt to the post COVID world.

 

[MikeWM]

Who, for example, says that "self communication by the laity" is not permitted?

In the RC Church, I believe all these 'rules' stem from the belief in transubstantiation - that the bread and wine are therefore especially precious substances and very great care needs to be taken with them.

(Hence when taking the bread/body, it has to be taken on the tongue or, if taken in the hand, it needs to be placed in the mouth by the communicant while still in the sight of the priest/eucharistic minister distributing it. The 'taking back to the pew' mentioned a few posts above would not be acceptable in an RC service).

As Holy Communion is still important to many Christians, churches need to adapt the rules and procedures for adminstering it, both to cope with the shortage of clergy, and to adapt to the post COVID world.

I think the Church would argue that some fundamental things are more important than temporal circumstances. Or rather, I'd hope they would - but their behaviour over the last 18 months hasn't shown that much.

 

[tspaul26]

But several nonconformist denominations, such as the Baptists and Methodists, use specially made individual cups into which wine is poured.

I have added a note to my post above to make clear that I was referring to the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church, in case that was not already sufficiently apparent.

I think that this is just as valid a method of receiving wine at holy communion as intinction and use of the common chalice.

You might very well think that. Neither the Church nor I agree on that front.

All of the "rules" that you quote are man made, and are based on human interpretation of what Christ himself meant when he said "Do this, in remembrance of me" at the last supper.

Who, for example, says that "self communication by the laity" is not permitted? If there is a reference to this in the Bible, I would be interested to know where it is. Nonconformist denominations believe in the "priesthood of all believers", and that consequently anyone is able to administer the sacraments.

The priesthood of all believers also forms part of Catholic doctrine.

There is no ’rulebook’ in the Bible in the Gospel narratives, but that does not really matter: tradition and the magisterium supply in this instance.

In any event, you might wish to refer to Matthew 14:19

This kind of reliance on scriptural references is, you will forgive me for saying, quite a protestant approach though.

There is a shortage of clergy, particularly in the Roman Catholic church and the Church of England.

Given the prevailing trend of participation by the faithful at many Catholic parishes, it might well be argued (somewhat in jest, of course) that there will be plenty of priests to go around for the remaining two laymen!

There never seems to be a shortage of bishops, though…

As Holy Communion is still important to many Christians, churches need to adapt the rules and procedures for adminstering it, both to cope with the shortage of clergy, and to adapt to the post COVID world.

Intinction and administration under a single species are perfectly valid, licit and appropriate in a Catholic context and require no adaptation. This is a solution in search of a problem.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

What's the current guidance (in England) as regards attending funeral services?

 

[tspaul26]

In the RC Church, I believe all these 'rules' stem from the belief in transubstantiation - that the bread and wine are therefore especially precious substances and very great care needs to be taken with them.

(Hence when taking the bread/body, it has to be taken on the tongue or, if taken in the hand, it needs to be placed in the mouth by the communicant while still in the sight of the priest/eucharistic minister distributing it. The 'taking back to the pew' mentioned a few posts above would not be acceptable in an RC service).

This is a very good post by way of core summary.

I think the Church would argue that some fundamental things are more important than temporal circumstances. Or rather, I'd hope they would - but their behaviour over the last 18 months hasn't shown that much.

Some greater wit than I once said that the road to Hell is paved with the skulls of priests and bishops are the lampposts.

What's the current guidance (in England) as regards attending funeral services?

This, apparently.

From the introduction:

There are no legal limits on the number of people who can attend funerals or commemorative events. Those attending, arranging or managing such events should consider that it may be harder to manage the risk of spreading COVID-19 if spaces are crowded, and venue operators may choose to set their own limits. Those involved in arranging or managing such events should see the working safely guidance.

From 19 July, you will not need to stay 2 metres apart from people you do not live with, and venues are not required to follow social distancing rules.

 

[Philip]

But several nonconformist denominations, such as the Baptists and Methodists, use specially made individual cups into which wine is poured.

I think that this is just as valid a method of receiving wine at holy communion as intinction and use of the common chalice.

All of the "rules" that you quote are man made, and are based on human interpretation of what Christ himself meant when he said "Do this, in remembrance of me" at the last supper.

Who, for example, says that "self communication by the laity" is not permitted? If there is a reference to this in the Bible, I would be interested to know where it is. Nonconformist denominations believe in the "priesthood of all believers", and that consequently anyone is able to administer the sacraments.

There is a shortage of clergy, particularly in the Roman Catholic church and the Church of England.

As Holy Communion is still important to many Christians, churches need to adapt the rules and procedures for adminstering it, both to cope with the shortage of clergy, and to adapt to the post COVID world.

The Sunday obligation to attend Mass in the RC Church is currently suspended, so instead a prayer of Spiritual Communion is said for those watching on livestreams who aren't attending the Mass in person.

 

[MikeWM]

The Sunday obligation to attend Mass in the RC Church is currently suspended,

A technical question that I can't seem to find a simple answer to on the internet - while Bishops can suspend the Sunday obligation (under Canon Law 1248.2, presumably?), can they also suspend Canon Law 920 (requirement of the faithful to receive the Eucharist at least once a year)?

 

[Philip]

A technical question that I can't seem to find a simple answer to on the internet - while Bishops can suspend the Sunday obligation (under Canon Law 1248.2, presumably?), can they also suspend Canon Law 920 (requirement of the faithful to receive the Eucharist at least once a year)?

A brief google doesn't suggest it has been suspended, so I'm guessing Spiritual Communion is deemed in the Canon to be a suitable alternative to physically receiving the Eucharist, in exceptional circumstances maybe.

 

[MikeWM]

A brief google doesn't suggest it has been suspended, so I'm guessing Spiritual Communion is deemed in the Canon to be a suitable alternative to physically receiving the Eucharist, in exceptional circumstances maybe.

I do find it surprising more people haven't raised the issue and that it is so difficult to find an answer. I suppose this requirement is rather less known than the Sunday obligation.

 

[tspaul26]

A technical question that I can't seem to find a simple answer to on the internet - while Bishops can suspend the Sunday obligation (under Canon Law 1248.2, presumably?), can they also suspend Canon Law 920 (requirement of the faithful to receive the Eucharist at least once a year)?

A brief google doesn't suggest it has been suspended, so I'm guessing Spiritual Communion is deemed in the Canon to be a suitable alternative to physically receiving the Eucharist, in exceptional circumstances maybe.

I do find it surprising more people haven't raised the issue and that it is so difficult to find an answer. I suppose this requirement is rather less known than the Sunday obligation.

There is no equivalent to canon 1246.2 which permits the conference of bishops to suppress the holy day and, by extension, the obligation to assist at Mass, but the English bishops did issue a formal dispensation from the Easter Duties contained in canons 916 and 920 for 2020. This would have been under the general power to dispense in canon 85 et ff.

The obligation to receive Holy Communion was certainly not dispensed in my archdiocese this year (the vicar of my parish had to announce this from the pulpit several times), although it might not be necessary to receive it during Eastertide if a global pandemic is construed as a “just cause” to receive at another time of the year.

In practice, though, Holy Communion has been available (certainly in the UK) so there isn’t really much excuse (from a canonical perspective) for non-reception.

A spiritual communion does not suffice.

 

[Philip]

A spiritual communion does not suffice.

Is this part of the canon law or a matter of opinion?

 

[tspaul26]

Is this part of the canon law or a matter of opinion?

Canon 920 requires that the faithful “receive Holy Communion”, not merely make a spiritual communion.

The prescriptive obligation dates back to at least the Fourth Lateran Council. If you want to read more about it then Lateran IV Constitutiones n.21 would be a good starting point.

 

[MikeWM]

There is no equivalent to canon 1246.2 which permits the conference of bishops to suppress the holy day and, by extension, the obligation to assist at Mass, but the English bishops did issue a formal dispensation from the Easter Duties contained in canons 916 and 920 for 2020. This would have been under the general power to dispense in canon 85 et ff.

The obligation to receive Holy Communion was certainly not dispensed in my archdiocese this year (the vicar of my parish had to announce this from the pulpit several times), although it might not be necessary to receive it during Eastertide if a global pandemic is construed as a “just cause” to receive at another time of the year.

In practice, though, Holy Communion has been available (certainly in the UK) so there isn’t really much excuse (from a canonical perspective) for non-reception.

A spiritual communion does not suffice.

Thanks for the detailed answer. I think the churches were all closed for the whole of Eastertide 2020, though I suppose that will qualify as a sufficiently just cause to have caught up later!

(I suppose a very concerned priest may have gone door-to-door in his parish to deliver the Eucharist to the faithful, at a time when those of faith were probably more in need of the sacraments than ever, but sadly I've not heard of any priests that have actually done so).

 

[tspaul26]

(I suppose a very concerned priest may have gone door-to-door in his parish to deliver the Eucharist to the faithful, at a time when those of faith were probably more in need of the sacraments than ever, but sadly I've not heard of any priests that have actually done so).

As far as I am aware, any such itinerant visits have been kept very much on the down low to avoid attracting attention from the po-po and other undesirables.

 

[AY1975]

Intinction and administration under a single species are perfectly valid, licit and appropriate in a Catholic context and require no adaptation. This is a solution in search of a problem.

In the RC church it has historically been the norm for the laity to only receive communion in one kind (i.e. the host only) and for only the celebrant to drink the wine, presumably for reasons of hygiene. Receiving in one kind only still seems to be the norm in Catholic churches in mainland Europe, and I think RC churches in Britain only started offering communion in both kinds to the laity in the 1970s or 80s. Even where communion is offered in both kinds under normal pre-Covid circumstances, some people choose to receive only the host and not the wine, though.

The C of E is also currently only offering communion in one kind (except where individual cups are used as I mentioned above). The use of the common chalice was also suspended during the 2009 swine flu outbreak. At my church during that period, after everyone had received the bread only, our vicar would then drink the wine himself and say "The blood of Christ, shed for us all."

 

[tspaul26]

In the RC church it has historically been the norm for the laity to only receive communion in one kind (i.e. the host only) and for only the celebrant to drink the wine, presumably for reasons of hygiene.

Not necessarily that clear cut. A rubric for lay communicants to receive (unconsecrated) wine from a shared chalice was introduced after the Council of Lambeth in 1281 and only formally removed from the Missal in 1962.

I believe it is also the norm to receive under both species in the Mozarabic Rite.

Receiving in one kind only still seems to be the norm in Catholic churches in mainland Europe, and I think RC churches in Britain only started offering communion in both kinds to the laity in the 1970s or 80s. Even where communion is offered in both kinds under normal pre-Covid circumstances, some people choose to receive only the host and not the wine, though.

Communion under both species is quite variable in Britain in my experience. Anecdotally, I would say that communion under one species is slightly more common and there is nothing lacking in that approach.