Like many other people, I was very happy to see the First Presidency’s message last week where they urged members to get vaccinated against COVID and to wear masks. Sure, I can quibble with the timing (it would have been nice if they had said this months ago) or the wording (the caveat that masks are only urged “whenever social distancing is not possible” seems a little silly given that social distancing is pretty much impossible at church, when entering and exiting at the very least), but overall it’s excellent. It’s a welcome sign that the First Presidency actually does see themselves as running the Church, and they don’t intend to cede control of the American part of the Church entirely to the Fox News crowd.
I was really curious to see what effect the letter would have in my ward. First, some background: I live in a suburban ward in the American Midwest. It’s almost entirely white people. Politically, it strikes me as pretty middle of the road for wards I’ve lived in. As you’d guess, there are definitely more people on the conservative side, but there are also a smattering of Democrats. Among the conservatives, there are at least some old-school conservatives who really don’t like Trump, but there are also some who love him and his populist message of exclusion and hatred.
When the pandemic really took off last March, like every other ward, my ward stopped meeting in person. We had home church or Zoom church for about a year, coming back with masking and social distancing (every other pew was blocked off) this March. Masking was pretty close to 100% for a couple of months, although there were definitely people who wore them down off their noses or off their mouths entirely at times. When my state’s mask mandate ended a couple of months ago, masking fell from virtually 100% to maybe 20%. It has stayed pretty consistently at that level since then, with the same few families masking every week. The bishopric hasn’t been masking on the stand, but the young men blessing and passing the sacrament have been, I assume because the bishop is telling them to.
After the First Presidency’s letter came out, I heard from a friend in a neighboring ward that their bishop had pretty much said “meh” in response to it, and wasn’t planning to make any changes. But then our stake president emailed everyone in the stake and quoted the letter and said we needed to pay attention to it. After this, I was sure that masking in my ward would go up.
I was underwhelmed. Masking increased a little bit from the usual 20%, but really not very much. One member of the bishopric wore a mask, and a couple of other people who hadn’t for a few months did again. The change was so small, though, that if I hadn’t known the background, I suspect I would have guessed that it was ordinary week-to-week variation.
I’ve seen this said a bunch of other places already, but I’m really disappointed in anti-mask and anti-vax Mormons. By and large, they have been willing, even happy or thrilled, to go along with marginalization of women, LGBT people, and people of color. But this is the point at which they’re going to decide that “follow the prophet” is over, and that really it’s their personal choice whether or not to do it? Wearing a mask and getting a vaccine? The just-invented but suddenly crucially important right to infect others? I mean, to be clear, of course I support this conclusion. Certainly I myself am a picker and a chooser. But I feel like I’ve picked and chosen over far more weighty issues than the question of whether Russell M. Nelson has properly checked his agenda with Tucker Carlson.
Anyway, hopping off my soapbox, if you attended church in person yesterday, did you observe any change in masking? Did your local leaders bring the First Presidency’s letter up?
I attend a suburban ward on the northern Wasatch Front in Utah. (I.e. outside Utah County, which does matter.) For the last couple of months, my husband and I have been the only ones who are still masking and social distancing. We received email from both bishop and stake president asking us to follow the counsel from our prophet. My husband (a stake clerk) was asked to report back to the stake presidency what happened in our ward. No distancing. Maybe 15% wore masks. Among the no mask attendees was our high council visitor.
I live in Utah County, in a community that has a very low percentage of vaccinated citizens. I was hopeful when the First Presidency email came out, but on Sunday I was very disappointed. Masking had been less than 5 percent before the email. This Sunday, it was closer to 50 percent, which is a big improvement. But my disappointment came when the bishop, who was not wearing a mask, stood and mentioned the First Presidency’s email. He then reminded the members that of course they had their “personal choice” in the matter. Well, duh. Of course we do. But what is the responsible thing to do? Basically, with his example and his words, he was telling the anti-maskers and anti-vaxxers that it’s just fine to ignore the prophet on this matter. Personal choice in my ward is now enshrined above compassion, love of others, sacrifice, public health, and a host of other values. I grieve for the members of this church who have become more Republican than Mormon.
I am in a conservative community in California and our ward went from 3 or 4 people masking to 90% of the ward after the email came out.
Attended in West Bountiful, Utah. Bishop, an admitted anti-vaxxer, refused to read the letter and sat unmasked on the stand and was unmasked through the congregation through the congregation, classes and interviews for the rest of the day. Masked membership ticked up from 5% to about 40%. People will leave the church over this issue.
Our Northern Virginia ward saw a distinct increase in masking (over 50 percent, up from less than 10 percent two weeks ago), although some of it may not have been a direct result of the letter. We had stake conference last week and those attending in person were asked to mask up. (General authorities were present and I don’t know if they or the old stake president were the source of the request.) Some of that might have carried over to this week even without the letter (it would have in my case).
This week, the entire bishopric and the new stake president seated on the stand were masked. Interestingly, the high council speaker was not, although he sat on the other side of the stand and was arguably socially distanced. All of those blessing and passing the sacrament were masked, and they reverted to the bread-in-cups service after about a month of bread-in-trays service. The bishop read portions of the letter dealing with masks (no mention of vaccines) and explained that because we had blocked off every other row (as we have since resuming in-person meetings) we could probably qualify as socially distant during sacrament meeting, but in many classes social distancing would be impossible, so masks should be worn there. No restrictions on singing.
The new stake president is a CES employee who has a reputation for knowing and following the current party line precisely. (This is an improvement over some of his CES predecessors, who followed the party line of the 70s.) I don’t expect him call non-maskers out directly, but I do expect him to ask leaders to set the example.
I am in ultra conservative Idaho Falls, Idaho, and our ward went from just a few people masked to probably 90% of the attendees this week. I have to admit that I was pleasantly surprised.
That said, our ward is filled with professional, well educated people – I can think of 8 doctors off the top of my head, so that may have made a difference. 😉
Thanks, everyone, for your comments. I’m really happy to hear that it sounds like my ward was on the low end for response.
If you’re interested in hearing more people’s experiences, it looks like Peggy Fletcher Stack of the Salt Lake Tribune is getting a bunch of comments on her Facebook post that asked this same question. (Her post is public, so I think you can read it without logging in to Facebook.) There is certainly a wide variety of responses!
https://www.facebook.com/peggy.fletcherstack/posts/4142472272546378
I am vaccinated, and believe everyone should be. Be we cannot make vaccination the sole issue that the Church is focused on. Providing for the poor and needy is just one example.
The First Presidency chooses its words very carefully. It very deliberately chose “urge” rather than “require” or “mandate.” It is clear that the presidency is encouraging behavior, but is not mandating it.
The result is that masking is the new method or “virtue signaling.” It has become the way of declaring: “ Look at me, I am following the prophet better than you.” This is not what church attendance should be about.
Dear concerned brothers and sisters, it’s time that we stop judging our fellow members of the Church and learn some important facts concerning this matter. This First Presidency letter is NOT doctrine and an “urge” is not a commandment. A call to Church headquarters will tell you that the Church’s support of vaccination is “not prophetic” AND that this particular letter is “from the administrative side of the Church, not from the revelatory/prophetic side”. Consider the careful wording of this letter and the possible reasons behind it. Our governments are watching. How are our governments acting at this time? Are our freedoms and agency, the very thing we fought for in heaven, in jeopardy? We have been wisely counseled by our prophet to live by the Spirit in these latter days. This is The Church of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is the ONLY man we should put our faith in. One of Christ’s names is The Great Physician. There are many righteous and good members of the Church who have taken the time to study the events going on today (outside of main stream narratives) and who have prayerfully sought personal revelation concerning covering our airways and this EUA vaccine. Personal revelation is just that, PERSONAL. Not everyone will receive the same answer. Consider that not every member prayed for this vaccine and not every wise medical professional endorses this vaccine. Consider the counsel given to us for the care of our precious bodies in Doctrine & Covenants (Word of Wisdom and the “laying on of hands”). Consider what our handbook says about vaccination and also what our Core Doctrine says (there is nothing in our core doctrine about vaccination). The real test here may not be what you think. It just may be to love and accept ALL members of the Church regardless of whether or not they cover their faces and whether or not they get a vaccine.
JCS, that’s rich considering that we’ve spent decades at church using things like white shirts and (lack of) beards to show each other who’s following the prophet better. Only now, when you feel that maybe someone else will look like they’re following the prophet better than you, do you come around to not wanting judgment at church. Hilarious!
Lynne, I know it’s wicked of me, but I enjoy seeing you twist yourself in knots trying to explain away this straightforward First Presidency statement so you can hang on to your ridiculous anti-vax views. For the sake of humanity, I do wish you’d come around to reality, though.
Intriguing comments. In my Provo ward Sunday, the bishopric, stake president and perhaps 90% of the members were all masked last Sunday. It’s a pretty conservative bunch, but they recognize prophets mean what they say. To excuse oneself by claiming the church is merely encouraging us is empty rhetoric. When we learn of the thousands of church members who’ve died, including presidents of stakes, missions, temples, and more, the concern becomes increasingly real. Thankfully, the brethren have recently called us to love our neighbors, as well as to repent of attacks on our Capitol and Republic, the Constitution, the denial of election results, and multiple other extremist actions. But many Right Wingers who may have been baptized, but who now favor QAnon, the Trump Cult, etc. will continue rationalizing dangerous practices. It’s been the case ever since COVID was minimized and allowed to spread across America. The First Presidency’s mandate is clear, especially to anti-Vaxxers. There’s no way to explain it more forcefully until the day comes that such LDS folks are denied the opportunity to enter the temple, etc. We already see this mandate rolling out with respect to serving missions, ministering to families in wards, BYU-Hawaii admissions, etc.
I loved this part of your post: “I mean, to be clear, of course I support this conclusion. Certainly I myself am a picker and a chooser. But I feel like I’ve picked and chosen over far more weighty issues than the question of whether Russell M. Nelson has properly checked his agenda with Tucker Carlson.”
I can’t comment on the rest of your post because I don’t attend church anymore, but I really loved the expression of “holy cow that’s seriously your dealbreaker? At least pick a good dealbreaker!”
Anybody who loves their fellow man would not force them to take a vaccine that has not been approved by the FDA—the designated wise experts when it comes to this issue. We keep hearing “trust the experts.” Thus far, the FDA experts don’t trust the vaccine enough to approve it.
Thanks, Ed. Please peddle your ridiculous anti-vax conspiracy theories elsewhere.
And thanks, Melinda! I’m glad you liked that line!
Sure, Ed. Luckily, the FDA has approved the three major versions available in the USA, so that’s a bit of a non issue here: https://www.fda.gov/emergency-preparedness-and-response/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19/covid-19-vaccines. So, if you’re talking about loving your fellow man, you may also want to consider the known effects of COVID-19 that you’re able to lower the chances of spreading by being vaccinated.
Time for one hour church again? Two I work with have succumbed to it. Situation red in our area.
Our ward in Louisiana went to sacrament meeting only again starting this week. Masks and social distancing required, and specific instructions for which doors to enter and leave the building. Meetings have been available on Zoom since the beginning. I’m on Zoom so I don’t know how many are masking, but everyone in view of the camera was masked, except one of the speakers removed the mask during the talk. They have gone back to sanitizing the microphone and lectern between speakers.
And now the Pfizer vaccine has full approval of the FDA! https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-covid-19-vaccine