This past weekend, social media was full of posts by joyous Orthodox Christians. For many, this was the first Sunday in months they had attended a mostly normal liturgy. Masks were gone, along with social distancing. Some Orthodox Christians reported the largest attendance at liturgies since mid-2020. It was heartwarming to read.
The welcome changes resulted from the CDC updating its guidelines. Those fully vaccinated against Covid no longer needed to wear masks. The CDC guidelines were implemented by different Orthodox jurisdictions and dioceses in two different ways. These two policy approaches could be summarized as “no masks” and “no masks for the vaccinated.” They are very different in their social and spiritual effects, even if they look similar on the surface.
The “no masks” policy was put into effect by Metropolitan Joseph of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese, Archbishop Alexander of the Diocese of the South (OCA), and some other dioceses / jurisdictions. To paraphrase this policy, since any adult who wanted a vaccine has had the opportunity to get one, all restrictions are lifted. Anyone who wants to wear a mask can do so, but no one is required to. In addition, choirs, church school, coffee hour, etc. are all back. This move towards normal exceeds the CDC’s recommendations. After getting this guidance from Metropolitan Joseph, our local parish priest happily pronounced from the pulpit, “The pandemic is over!”
The “no masks for the vaccinated” policy is very different. It has been implemented by many dioceses of the OCA, most (possibly all) of the Greek Archdiocese, and in some other jurisdictions / dioceses. To explain it, we will quote the policy announcement from Metropolitan Alexios of the Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Atlanta (emphasis added):
Beyond giving a simple “yes” or “no” answer, it is important to consider the full text of the CDC’s guideline, which reads: “…fully vaccinated people no longer need to wear a mask or physically distance in any setting, except where required by federal, state, local rules, and regulations, including local business and workplace guidance.” Using God-given discernment, there is no practical (or indeed, legal) method by which any parish may determine which parishioners have been vaccinated, and which have not.
Therefore, after much thoughtful discussion, it was determined that the Metropolis will continue to ask our parishes to abide by the recommended CDC, as well as federal, state, and local guidelines, in a spirit of good faith. In the instance of this specific mask update, those who have been fully vaccinated, and wish to forego masks, may do so; just as we ask that those who have not been fully vaccinated to continue wearing masks. Finally, those who have been vaccinated (whether only partly or in full), and wish to continue wearing masks, may do so as well. Until CDC guidance is issued concerning those who have previously had COVID-19, we ask that those individuals continue to wear masks as well.
This policy is spiritually dangerous and illogical. If an unvaccinated person chooses to go maskless to a parish covered by such a policy, he or she is implicitly lying. Lying is a sin and so is disobedience to one’s bishop. CDC guidelines are not binding, but the directives of one’s bishop are. If an unvaccinated person refuses to wear a mask, he/she has fallen into sin in order to attend a Divine Liturgy. If an unvaccinated person wears a mask, everyone can plainly see his/her vaccination status. This trick is being used by multiple employers and governments as an alternative to using “vaccine passports.” No need to identify the vaccinated, if you can clearly identify those who aren’t.
Under this policy, children present a special problem. Children cannot be vaccinated, but have been until now required to wear masks. Adults are clearly “on the honor” system concerning their vaccination status. Even in the “no masks for the vaccinated” parishes, no proof is needed. But children under 12 cannot be vaccinated. How can you resume church school or other activities without masks, if you know that everyone in the room is too young to be vaccinated? Will this policy lead to masked children standing next to unmasked adults, or will everyone look the other way, despite the clear directive of the bishop?
Only somewhere between 40 to 45% of the U.S. adult population is “fully vaccinated” against Covid. Far fewer adolescents (12 to 16) have been vaccinated, and almost no younger children as that has not yet been approved. So if a parish covered by a “no masks for vaccinated” policy looked practically normal – what are we to make of that fact? Quite simply, many unvaccinated parishioners must have taken advantage of the “honor” system to throw away their masks.
Related Posts:
Do not get me wrong on this topic. I have been against masks in liturgy, and everywhere else, since the beginning. Contributors to Orthodox Reflections have frequently published studies and graphs illustrating that masks don’t work, are harmful physically and spiritually, weaken our Orthodox witness, and encourage divisions within parishes. In addition, we have frequently noted that masks as a policy were predicated on the notion of asymptomatic spread, which has been proven to not actually be a thing. There is no scientific basis for mandating that healthy people wear masks or stay six feet apart.
Despite our best efforts, however, we have continued to receive comments and feedback asserting that masks and social distancing save lives. We expect, however, that the recently revealed Fauci emails will put these controversies behind us. In this email, Fauci wrote, “The typical mask you buy in the drug store is not really effective in keeping out virus, which is small enough to pass through material. It might, however, provide some slight benefit in keep out gross droplets if someone coughs or sneezes on you.” In this email, Fauci downplayed asymptomatic transmission, “……most transmissions occur from someone who is symptomatic.”
The situation is such that Governor Ron DeSantis of Florida said, “I think now with Fauci’s emails . . . it’s pretty clear that a lot of this stuff was fly by the seat of your pants guidance. This was not based on hard data.”
Clearly, I am not endorsing continued mandatory masks in the Divine Liturgy. I am also not endorsing taking the Covid vaccines. As we have noted in previous articles, the Covid vaccines make use of aborted fetal cells, carry high risks, are still experimental, and are effective 1.2% of the time or less. They are simply not worth it, even for those at high risk from Covid, which primarily includes only the very old and/or infirm among us.
But despite not supporting masks or the vaccines, I cannot in good conscience endorse an unvaccinated person attending a “no masks for the vaccinated” policy parish without a mask. You can’t morally ignore this policy. Rather, the policy itself must be changed. The policy wrongly calls out the unvaccinated. It creates divisions not only within parishes, but also across jurisdictions and even within jurisdictions. Having two different policies shows disunity at a time when our common Orthodox witness is most needed. It encourages implicit lying. Worst of all, it aligns parishes under this policy with those seeking to bribe and coerce people into taking a vaccine they do not want.
Neither policy is perfect in my opinion. Both rely in some way on CDC guidelines at a time when that organization has lot almost all of its credibility in the eyes of the general public. (Just look at the changes in school reopening “guidance” as a result of teacher union lobbying as one reason why.) Nor does either policy reject any of the misguided restrictions of the past year. Even so, the “no masks” policy is clearly better, and more spiritually healthy, than the “no masks for the vaccinated” policy. This is an area where all Orthodox jurisdictions should speak with one clear, common voice – no masks or restrictions for anyone attending Divine Liturgy.
Nicholas – member of the Western Rite Vicariate, a part of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese in America, a COVID refugee from the Greek Archdiocese
It’s not a sin to ignore an anti Christian directive no matter who it comes from. People in that situation need to just not wear a mask. Throughout history, Orthodoxy has been kept by the laity in the face of heretical clergy. It’s time for us to carry the true faith again.
It may be worth considering that it is not a lie to refuse to live by lies.
Take the ideas brought up in this article, for example –
https://inklesspen.blog/2021/05/25/have-we-lived-by-lies/
Yes, Rahab’s actions (Joshua 2) may soon become more significant and meaningful for those who desire to be faithful Orthodox Christians!
In the world of aviation, the pilot is ultimately responsible, regardless of what the tower says. Here is what I mean. The pilot is submitted to the tower control and makes no move without clearing it with the tower. Every elevation change is cleared with the controlling jurisdiction before executed. At the same time, if the tower gives a directive and the pilot deems it dangerous, he is required to take the action in his view to be the safe one regardless of what the tower says. If the tower gives a heading that crashes the plane, he cannot blame the tower, when he saw the error. Ultimately, he is the final authority for his plane and the people on board, because he is at the controls, in the situation at hand; every court in the land views it this way. This is life as well. The bishop is not the final authority in your life, you are. Submission is voluntary, not coerced. Here is where trust becomes the primary issue. Who can we trust? While we are to honor, respect, and obey, there are obvious limitations, nothing is absolute and God knows that, and He is the final judge, not men.
Is there a time to lie? Just asking the question. Borrowing a story from Protestantism: Deitrick Bonhoeffer ran into a situation where Christians in Europe were hiding Jews from the Nazis. In some cases if the SS arrived knocking on the door, and asked if there were Jews hiding inside some Christians refused to lie and gave up the cache of hidden Jews and the Jews died. Bonhoeffer explained to these people, that because the Nazis were dishonest in their intent, it was not a sin to lie and say there were no Jews in the house. This is just a thought for consideration for some finding themselves in impossible situations. Bonhoeffer’s rationale, was one of reciprocity (as I recall) that if authorities are not forthright with you, there is no onus to be honest with them. I am not saying this is it (some might say it is), but it might soon come to this.
This example is not a lie to “cooperate” with the regime of the antichrist, it is a “lie” to go against them. It was not a lie to obtain something from the SS, it was a lie to make them go away. I think this is the difference. And there are often ways to tell the truth anyway using clever words – I have heard examples. And at this point, we have to think about “who” or “what” our churches are cooperating with and if is something we want to go against or go along with.
I have to say that I agree with you 100% on this. To try to get away with not wearing a mask when it is required, is one thing. It’s not lying. It doing something bold and “asking permission later.” Everyone could see the maskless face. Anyone could ask you to leave, etc.
To go to a church where the pretext is ONLY unvaccinated people need to wear mask, is different. No one knows what is happening in the same way as the previous scenario. It’s different. (For the record, I wore a mask in church for all over 10 minutes in the past 14 months and drove a long distance when I could to get somewhere with normal worship.)
There is something much bigger going on here…as someone said in another forum once, communion “isn’t magic.” We don’t need to take it at every opportunity reqardless of the circumstances. Would you take it from the heretic Arius? I’m not saying what is going on is heresy because I don’t know, but it certainly “something.”
A bigger question is what Orthodox Christian would want to attend a parish and commune under a bishop with such rules? Driving to another farther parish and communing less frequently seems superior to subjecting yourself (an image of God) to such anti-christian rules.
Basically, if you want to practice not submitting to the regime of the antichrist, then we should not be submitting to rules that are in the spirit of the antichrist.
This is not about how often we should or should not be taking communion.
If a struggling priest finds himself in a bind yet again, then as an elder from Greece or someone said, ask if you can wait in the nave/lobby maskless during service and not come in and take communion at the right time OR ask if he will bring communion to house, but we should not submit to anti-christian rules. Most people in America have other options within a three hour radius.
Obviously its different if most of the parish and priest does not want to follow this blind obedience, then I agree with the other posters. This is why Fr. Peter Heers doesn’t want to give blanket advice to anyone…Is the spirit of antichrist taking hold at a specific parish, or not? Are the priest and laity resisting together, or not? Everyone’s situation is different. We left a parish in the past year because the spirit of Christ was not prevailing. But if an entire parish is practicing the new Covid religion except you and a couple others, maybe its time to find another parish.
Our biggest concern with the “no masks for vaccinated” are 1) that it becomes a gateway to vaccines passports enforced by the clergy. If you become accustomed to segregating the Faithful, then what is one more step in that direction? The Kingdom of the anti-Christ is built step by step. 2) this is subtle pressure encouraging the vaccine, and as we noted in the article, puts those adhering to this policy on the side of very unsavory forces trying to bribe / coerce. 3) This sets the stage for all kinds of conflicts. This is a bad policy. As we noted, kids can’t be vaccinated. If the priest looks the other way on kids, what happens when snitches report that to the bishop? Or if friends turn in other friends to the bishop? This is not a good policy and should be ditched in favor of “no masks” for anyone. 4) This policy does set the stage for priests and parishes to rebel against the bishop. The bishops who put out this policy should not be setting that stage. 5) If we get used to this policy by simply ignoring it, that does not make it go away. There are spiritual costs to this. The policy itself is shameful and wrong, and needs to go. “Working around” the policy by not wearing a mask may be justified, but if anyone does then we would urge you to be upfront about it and let the chips fall where they may. That is a true act of resistance to a bad policy. Any bishop adopting this policy should have to live with the consequences. Quietly, implicitly claiming vaccinated status by not wearing a mask seems to us to be rewarding the bishops in a way. They can make this policy, but then not deal with the consequences. Things just drift back to “normal”, when under the surface there are serious threats looming. The “no mask” policy is the bare minimum we should accept.
Great points! And I think it will be very rare for a parish priest to be resisting these measures based on what we have seen anyway. This puts a decent priest in a difficult situation if he cannot easily change jurisdictions, but wants to serve his faithful. Your right – its just a terrible policy. I personally wouldn’t commune under a bishop with this policy no matter what. I would wait it out or travel somewhere. I was just trying to acknowledge how messy the situation is in America and that there could be some small exceptions in this messiness, but as you say, probably not. The stronger thing is to not comply/not attend or OPENLY resist.
Unfortunately I have to respectfully disagree here. Blind obedience to hierarchical mandates is just as much a sin as defying their guidances adhering to the Gospel.
Consider the mountain of nuance: countless people willingly excommunicated themselves due to weakened faith under this Covidian era.
I would have hoped your approach would be much more holistic. The ‘masks for non vaccinated’ parishes are under demonic influence with such a policy – that we can agree on, but telling your readers they are implicitly lying by merely yearning for the Medicine of Immortality is really sad, perhaps encourage an alternative instead?
Finally, Church history reveals that the faithful at one time attended Divine Liturgy in the catacombs during Roman persecution. How are the nonvaxxed (which we agree, that jab is demonic for several reasons), attending a ‘masks for nonvaxxed’ parish a different scenario of persevering under persecution?
The Orthodox are called to a life of ascetic struggle and remembrance of martyrdom. The problem is not in partaking of the Liturgy under such draconian mandates, the problem is much bigger than that and you need to deliberately address the hierarchical tyranny afflicting the faithful. Yes, we agree the policy must change yet this article is discouraging parishioners from communing and that is what’s truly indefensible. The alternative may not be even be an option for Orthodox Christians.
Lord have mercy.
Not discouraging them to commune. The policy is wrong. We have always opposed masks. We are trying to point out that the bishops who adopt the “vaccinated” policy are setting up a real problem and, like many other of these policies, it will hurt real people. It is completely wrong. What an individual does, wear the mask or not, is up to the individual. We are not singling out individual Christians. It is the policy that needs to change. Even the “no masks” policy doesn’t go far enough, but at least it is better.
“This policy is spiritually dangerous and illogical. If an unvaccinated person chooses to go maskless to a parish covered by such a policy, he or she is implicitly lying. Lying is a sin and so is disobedience to one’s bishop. CDC guidelines are not binding, but the directives of one’s bishop are. If an unvaccinated person refuses to wear a mask, he/she has fallen into sin in order to attend a Divine Liturgy.”
That last sentence of yours is especially problematic, that’s discouraging your readers to commune and while you’re arguing to prevent implicitly lying, this article is explicitly discouraging receiving the Gifts. You haven’t addressed the hierarchal power grabs nor lack of faith. The alternative would be finding a ‘no mask’ parish and again, that may not be an option for the faithful.
You are indirectly defrauding your readers by saying their ‘lying’ for wanting to receive Holy Communion at the masks for nonvaxxed parishes. That’s the point of contention I have with this article.
Understood. Not the intention from our end. The focus we meant to provide was on the action of the bishops putting individuals in this situation. Our suspicion is that not a few bishops are “covering their butts,” legally speaking. By saying this, they avoid the ever present (at least in their minds) threat of lawsuits. We are sure that not a few people in leadership are essentially counting on people just not wearing masks. We don’t think you can “let the bishops off the hook” that way. All the bishops, minimally, should have followed the lead or Met. Joseph and Archbishop Alexander. This policy puts the emphasis on individual conscience. That is bad leadership. If you read any of our articles, you would see that we don’t even believe that masks are a legitimate requirement for attending liturgy. The bishops definitely overreached on all this. The bishops with the mask policy need to step up and end it. Our emphasis, which we were going for, was that bishops should not be putting parishioners in the situation to begin with. They are the ones who created this problem, and they need to solve it. Sweeping this under the rug by counting on parishioners to just “pretend to be vaccinated” (which we suspect some in leadership are) is a poor solution compared to the bishops taking responsibility.
Thank you for clarifying your position on this egregious concern for morality – the Orthodox context particularly.
I have read several of your articles and was a bit dismayed by this most recent one, but I appreciate your efforts to expand on what this situation represents for the faithful and their hierarchical leadership dilemmas.
Thank you for asking the questions. When you approach a topic, sometimes you don’t consider how your words can be interpreted differently. This was a good perspective for us to hear. When the chance arises, we might edit that section for clarity.
If a bishop is getting his opinions on Church attendance from the CDC instead of the Church’s canons and Holy Tradition, then his opinion on the topic is irrelevant.
>>Lying is a sin and so is disobedience to one’s bishop.
yeah true stuff, but this kind of mindless legalism is the kind of casuistry that led me out of the idiotic falsehood of catholicism.
there are no Jews hiding in my basement and I am following all MORALLY DEFENSIBLE laws and regulations, sir.
Kseniya – Not trying to come down on individuals. This is a logically and morally indefensible policy on the part of some bishops. It needs to change. “No masks” for anyone is the only truly acceptable policy. No Orthodox Christian should be in this position.
Seen sign on church that states in so many words, “enter at you own risk”. Politics has become a GREAT EVIL. Just see the lies and corruption people are being fed.