Back to Church Wishlist

The Church released guidelines a couple of days ago for how returning to church meetings will look. Given how quickly the Church acted in closing temples and suspending church meetings as the COVID-19 pandemic started, I’m disappointed that these guidelines don’t seem to take it all that seriously. This post is a laundry list of comments on the Church’s guidelines and a wishlist of guidelines I would like to see before I’d be really comfortable attending church in person again.

Greetings

Mormons are a handshaking people. Sometimes we’re even huggers. These types of greetings aren’t safe with the coronavirus on the loose. The Church’s guidelines do mention this, but only in the context of people known to be sick: “Avoid close contact with people who are sick (this may include avoiding shaking hands or other customary greetings).” This seems to overlook the entire problem we’re facing, which is that people who appear well may be carrying the virus! I wish they would have said more generally something about not engaging in greetings that involve touching other people, and suggesting touchless greetings like waves or bows in their place.

Sacrament

The guidelines suggest that people sit only in every other row in the chapel so that the sacrament can be passed to everyone directly. This is a good step, but I don’t think it goes far enough. A single symptom-free carrier priest could still infect an entire ward in a heartbeat. I like the idea I’ve seen several people suggest of having people bring their own bread and water. The priest would say the sacrament prayer like usual, but it would be blessing the bread and water people already have with them. This would be in keeping with the Church’s statement about the prayer-giver and the emblems having to be in the same location.

I suspect, though, that Church leaders wouldn’t go for such a solution, because it would require possibly non-priesthood-holders to prepare the sacrament, in whatever sense of the word prepare. So I have a more radical solution that is completely in keeping with the guidelines. How about if we have someone stand at the pulpit and say the sacrament prayer, but not to bless any emblems, but rather just to remind us of the sacrament and help us look forward to a time when we can take it again and recommit to live our covenants? This is precisely what the April document “Directions for Essential Ordinances, Blessings, and Other Church Functions” already recommends for people in “unusual circumstances” who don’t have access to the sacrament. Well, now we’re in the unusual circumstance of not being able to take the sacrament together safely, so how about if we put it on hold until we can?

This would take a forward-thinking bishop, but a side advantage of this setup would be that women could be the sacrament prayer readers some weeks. Remember that there’s nothing actually being blessed. It’s just like when individual people read and ponder the sacrament prayers at home, only now we’re in the same room, so we’re having one person read aloud for efficiency. As a believer in the need for women’s ordination, I love the idea of normalizing our hearing the sacrament prayers spoken in women’s voices.

Image credit: clipart-library.com

Singing

There is some evidence that singing is a particularly powerful way to spread the virus (although not everyone agrees.) I was disappointed, that other than suspending choirs, I didn’t find any mention of limiting singing in the guidelines. In fact, one of the pictures accompanying the Newsroom story (21 of 25) says in the caption “A Latter-day Saint family hold their face masks in their hands while singing hymns during a Sunday worship meeting.” The guidelines say that these photos were staged to “demonstrate how these principles may be properly applied.” So clearly Church leaders think congregational singing is fine.

I really wish they would have said we need to suspend congregational singing. I enjoy a good chorus of “Master, the Virus Is Raging” as much as the next person, but like with my previous points, we need to take seriously the possibility that people in our meetings are carrying the virus even if they don’t have symptoms.

There’s no reason we have to give up music entirely. We could have pianists and organists play hymns. We could have more instrumental musical numbers. Heck, we could even play recorded music. Let’s just not have the music be in a form that puts everyone at greater risk.

In anticipation of the likelihood that Church leaders, general and local, just aren’t likely to give up on singing, I’ve composed a special hymn for these troubled times.

Government authority

I did appreciate that the Church’s guidelines push back on the Ammon Bundys of the world, who are convinced that any limitation on their rights in the name of public health is a Satanic plot. The document “Administrative Principles in Challenging Times” says: “We acknowledge that in exceptional circumstances all individual rights may be reasonably restricted, for a time to protect the safety of the general public.”

People who don’t return immediately

The guidelines say a couple of times that people who aren’t well and people who are at particular risk should stay home. What I wish they would consider, though, is that people who work for the Church or for the BYUs will feel pressure to return to church immediately, as soon as their wards begin meeting again, so they don’t risk losing their temple recommend and therefore their job. It seems likely that most bishops would be understanding in such circumstances if a member of their ward didn’t feel comfortable returning to church right away because they’re at higher risk, or maybe even just because of concerns like I’m outlining in this post. But it seems like a big chance for them to take to assume that their bishop will be understanding when it’s always possible that he won’t. I wish the guidelines had explicitly told bishops to give members the benefit of the doubt when it comes to temple recommend renewal, particularly for Church employees.

Masks

I appreciate that the guidelines mention having people wear masks. Like with the government authority point, it’s good to see the Church pushing back on the radicals who say the virus is a hoax and masks are restricting their liberty. I especially like that so many of the photos accompanying the Newsroom story show people doing church things while wearing masks, because I think the images send a powerful message about normalizing mask wearing at church. I do wish, though, that the language had been stronger than it was. It always uses may rather than even going as far as should.

Cleaning the church

The guidelines acknowledge the need for cleaning, stating “Leaders should ensure that buildings are thoroughly cleaned after each set of meetings, especially areas that are touched, such as doorknobs, light switches, water fountains, microphones, and pulpits.” But there’s no guidance on how exactly to make all that cleaning happen. Particularly if wards aren’t going to be overlapping in the same building, are we looking at something like an hour sacrament meeting followed by an hour of cleaning followed by the next sacrament meeting and so forth? I’m guessing that, given that we struggle to keep buildings clean in ordinary times, there will be little done on this front, and when everyone gets sick from the buildings not being cleaned, the GAs will just sanitize their hands of it and say “we told you to clean in between.”

You already know what I’m going to suggest, right? This is a perfect time to hire professional custodians back! It’s not just a health-and-safety issue, but from the Church’s perspective, it would be great PR! I can see the headlines already: Mormon church hires thousands during medical and economic crisis!

Meeting size

The guidelines for Phase 1 of returning to church meetings say that up to 99 people could meet together. I understand that they probably want to allow lots of wards and branches to go right back to having their usual sacrament meetings, but this just seems way too high to me. I think it’s telling that in the pictures accompanying the Newsroom story, again, pictures staged to show proper application of the principles, it appears that there are no more than about 30 people in a pretty conventional sized chapel. If 99 is seriously a number that they think is reasonable, I wish they would have shown with pictures how they think that could happen. I suspect that something more like 30-40 is a safer upper limit given typical chapel size.

What did you like or dislike in the Church’s guidelines? What’s on your returning-to-church wishlist?

 

11 comments

  1. Amen! That covers a lot of my concerns, particularly the virus spread during singing. Love your hymn! Given that we’re great at vicarious ordinances, it seems like we could invoke some of those concepts with the sacrament. The bread and water isn’t literally Christ’s body, and thus as a symbol could be modified. I also have concerns about returning to the temple at some point–especially with the physical contact and the respiratory contagion. Wondering about modifying symbolic actions there as well.

  2. I fully support the church hiring professional custodians to clean our buildings daily. Weekly cleanings with church-provided, diluted-to-the-point-they-might-as-well-be-water products are not enough with Sunday services, single adult FHE, Mutual activities, Institute classes, baptisms, funerals, and ward activities/parties happening in church buildings on a regular basis.

    I can’t begin to imagine how stuffy the buildings are with not being opened up since church services were suspended… and if the buildings weren’t cleaned beforehand, the smell is probably awful with the trash bins and diaper pails still being full and allowed to marinate for a prolonged period of time.

    [Insert nauseous face emoji, vomiting face emoji, and face mask wearing emoji here]

    My ward meets in an older building and is the last of four wards to finish Sunday services. I will not feel comfortable going back to church unless every room in the building is deep cleaned with a strong disinfectant, the carpets are washed, and the furniture/upholstery are fumigated, with the promise that daily cleanings by a professional custodial service will occur.

  3. I like these! I’d add increasing building ventilation and air filtering, and a greeter at the outside door who administers hand sanitizer, gets verbal confirmation that the person has no symptoms and is not aware of having been exposed to a confirmed case, and screens for compliance with required masking before anyone comes in. I think my brain has broken at the stock photo’s implication that anybody would take off a mask in order to sing. Obviously wear it while singing–that is quite possibly the single most important time…

    On a different theme, it makes me sad whenever I see an idea pitched as good PR. I don’t disagree that job creation would be good PR! It just reminds me between the lines that 1) we all feel that justifying something as the right thing to do doesn’t cut it, and 2) top church admin seems really tuned to optimizing PR and 3) the church’s reputation is currently quite bad.

  4. I love your section in the sacrament! Amen.

    There is a lot that I don’t like about this announcement, but I have to admit that a general loosening of restrictions was needed. Meaning, there really is no reason that all meetings have to be cancelled simultaneously throughout the world if the governments around the world are not applying the same restrictions. Setting some guidelines and adjusting for local regulations seems right to me.

    I think they should emphasize more the need for safety. We shouldn’t rush back to church just because we can. Some one needs to *emphatically* encourage at-risk folks to stay home. I’m particularly annoyed that the area authority for Utah has authorized return to church already, because local case numbers are still increasing, albeit gradually. From all indications, our stake is going to be quite careful and methodical, so that is looking good. I hope everyone else can say the same.

    As far as cleaning goes, everyone seems to have different ideas about what needs to be cleaned and how, which is a pretty good argument for professional cleaning. Professionals could be trained to clean in a consistent and reliable manner, and held accountable. With volunteer cleaning you really don’t know what you’re going to get, even if you have conscientious volunteers, because you don’t have consistent knowledge and skills.

  5. I like Marrissa’s idea for increased building ventilation and air filtering. Again, have these implemented by professionals, not service missionaries or volunteers.

    Professionally – and frequently – cleaned buildings, increased building ventilation done by a professional, and regular air filtering done by a professional (see where I’m going here?) would go a long way in keeping everyone healthy and preventing sickness of all kinds.

  6. I also agree with Rockwell’s comment that sick and at-risk people need to be told to stay home.

    Pre-Covid, I witnessed sick people with fevers and even the chicken pox – bring their sick kids to church. That was selfish and irresponsible, and put many people’s health – and even lives – at risk.

  7. Thanks for your comments!

    acw–that’s a great point about the temple. It seems like that might be even more concerning than going to church. The GAs are probably more leery of modifying it too. I wonder if they’re working on plans for doing so or if they’ll ask people to sit away from each other and hope for the best. At least there isn’t singing!

    JC–good point about how the church buildings probably need a good cleaning before anyone meets there again. And about how on an ongoing basis, they need more than weekly cleaning.

    Marrissa–I like your idea of having someone screening people as they arrive. And the extra filtering and air circulation cleaning. And I agree about how sad the PR angle is. I’m not a fan of it, but I know that Church leaders are deeply concerned with how the Church is perceived, so I always hope it can nudge them in the right direction when it lines up with what I hope they do anyway!

    Rockwell–that’s an interesting point about the all-at-once announcement at the beginning. I agree that the lack of symmetry is interesting. Looking back, for my persona situation, I’m kind of glad that they just pulled the trigger and suspended meetings everywhere when they did. At the time, I wondered if my local leaders would ever cancel if given the option. I do kind of think that an “at local-leaders’ discretion” like the return announcement is risks a dynamic where people feel like to show their faithfulness, of course they should have meetings. I worried that if an announcement weren’t made at a higher level to cancel, my stake would never have canceled, because of this dynamic. It will be interesting to see how the return goes. I’m not surprised that the Utah Area Presidency has already jumped to show that they’re among the righteous by announcing that meetings can go forward.

  8. Ziff, your hymn is quite lovely, especially in its use of a traditional Jaredite tune. I believe that’s what they sang in their boats that were tight like unto a dish.

    With regard to your suggestion about just reading the sacrament prayers, for what it’s worth, I’ve been listening to lots of virtual Eucharist services these last few months (especially the one at the National Cathedral). They do the traditional Eucharistic liturgy, but then we say a prayer together that’s a sort of spiritual communion, expressing our desire to take communion and asking Christ to come into our hearts. I find it comforting to hear the familiar language, even though we don’t actually take communion. I would think that reading the sacrament prayers could have the same effect; it’s not the same, obviously, but it does give you a sense of familiar ritual and puts you in a contemplative space.

  9. That’s great, Lynnette! I’m glad to hear that a similar thing has already been tried and that it’s been meaningful. We Mormons should be more open to borrowing ideas from other churches for sure!

  10. This thought just occurred to me:

    With there being a limit on how many people can attend Sunday services, what will this mean for Mutual, Primary activities, EQP/RS gatherings, and ward parties?

    Will these events be suspended indefinitely? Is there a way to host any of these events safely and in line with church/local/state laws while allowing for everyone to be included?

  11. Great questions, JC. I guess I was overly focused on sacrament meeting in the post, but there are so many other activities that have to be evaluated too.

Comments are closed.