Lex Anteinternet: Easter 2021. Next Year In Jerusalem.

Lex Anteinternet: Easter 2021. Next Year In Jerusalem.: 

Easter 2021. Next Year In Jerusalem.

This is Easter on the Latin Rite liturgical calendar for 2021, thereby being the date that almost everyone who observes it will observe it on.  Orthodox Easter this year is nearly a month away, on May 2.

It's a second sad Easter in a row.

For the second time we're facing an Easter in which the gloom of the Coronavirus Pandemic lingers overhead.  Perhaps, in that way, we're looking at an Easter that actually fits historical times, i.e., most of human history, more than our own times, and therefore should give us more to look forward to with the oncoming advance of Spring.

Still, it probably doesn't, and in no small part due to the really odd and unsettled times we're generally in.  

For those in the Diocese of  Cheyenne, such as myself, we still have a dispensation in place if we feel we should use it.  I've noted myself earlier in this blog that I wasn't really happy about Mass's being suspended in the first place, although I'd perhaps now reluctantly concede that it was necessary. As also earlier noted, when they opened back up I resumed going, but when infections started to climb and the vaccine was on the horizon, I dropped back out and made use of the dispensation.

Throughout this entire pandemic, my wife has really been the one who managed our approach to it, being diligent and careful and making me the same.  I take the pandemic very seriously and frankly I'm at the point where those who casually deny its anything anger me.  It truly is.  I've known, as we all do by now, a host of people who have had it and a couple of them are dead.  People who give the flippant "it's no worth than the flu" don't seem to realize that the flu isn't a cold either and that its a real killer.  The reason we tolerate the flu like we do is that we have no choice.  Here we do, but we're rapidly losing out on that choice in part because people who want to believe that it amounts to nothing or wild theories about its original or the vaccine are being slow to get vaccinated.  And in our modern society, in which we've elevated the individual and his rights and beliefs to a near religion we aren't willing to use any form of compulsion in order to make sure the appropriate number of vaccinations are accomplished.

That day may never have been possible in any event. We may have lost out on that opportunity from the very first instance, in which case SARS-CoV-2 will be an endemic disease and go on killing.  

At least one person I know who takes the disease very seriously, but who is younger and therefore able to bear more risks, has just become numb to it.  That is, it's real, they got vaccinated, but they're otherwise too fatigued to observe much in the way of any other precaution.  As noted, some people never took any as they refused to believe it was real.  Others, and I find this approach the oddest, accepted it was real and took some precautions, unless they were personally inconvenient.  

The level of precautions a person took and wear tends to reflect a person's beliefs. The Catholic Church in Wyoming obviously took it very seriously in shutting things down, but I frankly think the Church really dropped the ball in regard to outreach to parishioners.  Even on my end, as a former lector and a former council member, I received very little contact during the pandemic from my diocese.  If I've received this litter, and have been a faithful and loyal Catholic my entire life, I have to think that marginal Catholics are in no better position than I am.  One thing the Church is really going to have to answer for, and I mean in this realm and the next, is the complete and utter failure, it seems to me, to try to reach out during the pandemic.  A parish priest is actually responsible for all of the souls in his diocese.  If the Catholic souls aren't getting any contact. . . well. . . there's going to be questions that will have to be answered.

Anyhow, at Mass I noticed that almost everyone was very observant about wearing masks, which were required, although there's always the few who will pull them down below their nose at which point they're pointless.  Sometimes that's ignorance and in others its a form of protest.  Be that as it may, they were there.

I'm told, but don't know, that in some Protestant churches following the COVID guidelines were simply suspended completely.

In a civil context, in some places I've been too that's very much the case.  One local sporting goods store had signs about wearing masks but few on the staff did. A few men who work in the store do and have, but the huge army of 20 something girls that loiters near the cash registers grossly overmanning them never did.  Sporting goods stores here are almost a center of civil protest/COVID denial.

Circling back around, during the pandemic my wife has lead the charge and we've both been very good about doing what we should. We haven't been to a restaurant in a year, with one noon meal that was a work invitation, and two for out of town depositions, being the exception.  I've been invited to "go get a beer" after work, but I declined, something made easy by the fact I decline that invitation usually anyway.  

Anyhow, I've now had both of my COVID 19 vaccinations.  My wife has had her first.  My kids have both had theirs.  Only my son and my wife are in the window of non protection, as they're either waiting for their second shot or have just had theirs.

I was going to resume Mass attendance last week, but my daughter pointed out that my wife had been so good about her observation of the rules and just had her shot, so we should probably abstain.  She didn't come home for Easter due to school and work and will make Mass where she is.  Here we debated it last night and ultimately decided, for the same reason, to wait one more week.

Locally it turns out that of the three parishes two were requiring reservations, but once again due to the phenomenally bad outreach the Church's have, that wasn't apparent at the one we were going to go to until this morning when I happened to find that was on their video feed.  For goodness sakes, is there any excuse for not getting this out in some other fashion?  So we likely would have been turned away.  That would have lead us to the parish across town which is not requiring reservations, but which was anticipating putting overflow in the poorly ventilated basement so that those there could watch it on television.

Next year, for those of us still in the temporal realm, Mass in the normal fashion will have resumed as life in the normal fashion will have had to.  The country can't keep being shut down forever and the entire population, save for those who really have the resources to do nothing at all, has to get moving again and patience has worn thing.  My guess is that we will not reach the "herd immunity" threshold as there will be those who steadfastly refuse to believe that the disease is serious or who will continue to believe myths about vaccines which are allowed to circulate in the post Cold War scientific age.  Those who are vaccinated will get yearly boosters which will be more or less effective. Some will get sick and some of them will die and for some people that will come as a surprise.  But life will return to normal, with normal in this instance begin an unfortunate blend of the 1970s inflationary era, brought on by profligate government spending, and 2010/20s moral sinkage.

On that latter item, there were those who hoped that the pandemic might refocus society and cause some reflection on where we were going and what we were doing.  Perhaps some of that did occur, but there does not seem to be much evidence of it now. And to the extent it did, a lot of that was swept away by political forces that refused to acknowledge defeat and countervailing ones that accordingly came into power seeking to bring in every "progressive" item on that laundry list that's been thought of since the late 1890s.  Things are really not looking that good, and in a lot of ways.

But next year, at least there will be Mass.

Jews traditionally end the Passover Sedar with "Next Year in Jerusalem", signaling an obvious deep religious hope.

Next year in Jerusalem. ^[1].

__________________________________________________________________________________

Footnotes:

1.  I don't think this is incapable of being misunderstood, but just in case, and because I'm occasionally asked, this is meant symbolically here.  I have absolutely no interest whatsoever in visiting Jerusalem.  I.e., none.  This isn't mean to be rude, but I know it baffles people, and as I have a friend whose been once and who is planning to return again, I know I'll be asked that along these lines; "I'm going on the church trip to Jerusalem. .  . wouldn't you like to go?" followed by all the things that a person could see in Jerusalem.

That's great for people who want to see it, but I don't.  I don't have any interest in going anywhere in the Holy Land, which may be odd for a Christian, but I don't.  None.  Indeed, if I were to go to anywhere in the Middle East the locations would be limited to certain big desert areas as I like big deserts.  I'm not keen on cities in general, and particularly not large crowded ones.

FWIW, I often give the same reaction to other venues that feature lots of people.  "Wouldn't you like to go to China?".  No, I would not.  "London?".  M'eh.

Diocese of Cheyenne: "Those who have been fully vaccinated, who are well, who do not have underlying health conditions or are in a high-risk category, and who do not have significant anxiety of becoming ill by participating in Mass, should join their parish in celebrating the Eucharist. . . "

 

Churches of the West: On the morality of the Coronavirus Vaccines.

In what should put this matter to rest, the Vatican indicated that the vaccines are not morally objectionable.

Churches of the West: On the morality of the Coronavirus Vaccines.: This is something that you have to be pretty attuned, I think, to the Catholic world to pick up on, and to appreciate.  There's been som...

For most rank and file orthodox Catholics this will in fact be the end of this debate, but my prediction is that for some it will not for some Rad Trads who have headed off in the Dr. Taylor Marshall/Patrick Coffin direction.  

 

On the morality of the Coronavirus Vaccines.

This is something that you have to be pretty attuned, I think, to the Catholic world to pick up on, and to appreciate.  There's been some questioning in Catholic circles on whether its morally permissible to take the Coronavirus vaccines.

Before I get any further, let me state that at least in the Diocese of Cheyenne, where I live, it is.  Our Bishop has so declared.

Okay, how does this all come up?

Well, not the way that you might suppose, at least if you are an American. There isn't a raging debate in the Catholic World about the efficacy of vaccinations.  While that debate might exist in American society at large, where there's an anti Science tradition that's very long in standing, and which has been reamplified in recent years due to a decrease in science funding in education which was sufficiently pronounced such the standards of education could fall so low that a twit like Jenny McCarthy, who is only qualified as a big boob model, is actually taken seriously on a scientific matter (who would listen to McCarthy on anything is beyond me).  No, this topic comes up due to a long standing Catholic moral principle holding that life can only be taken by a person in self defense.

Catholics are extremely serious about this.  Much more so than other non pacifist. Catholics aren't overall pacifists, but the Church's view on when life can be taken is quite strict.  It's often highly misunderstood, in part because the majority of Christians in the world are Catholic and lots of people in every religion will fail to follow the tenants of their faith.*  And its also a standard that has evolved a bit as society and technology has evolved, while the wider facet of that being ignored has also tended to be ignored in some quarters.  Perhaps the most dramatic examples of that might be the bombing campaigns of World War Two, a war for which the Allied cause is often cited as being about as close to a "just war" as a war can be.  Be that as it may, it's nearly impossible to reconcile some of the Allied bombing efforts of the Second World War with justly fighting a war, and the use of the Atomic Bombs at the wars end almost certainly cannot be.  Be that as it may, there were plenty of Catholic aircrewmen on bombers during the war.

And what isn't at issue is a religion based disagreement with science.  Indeed, in spite of the intrusion of Protestant beliefs into the pews of Catholic Americans to some extent, the Catholic Church as a whole is hugely supportive of and a supporter of science.  Indeed, ironically, at least one of the common scientific beliefs that some fundamentalist Protestants really have trouble with is one that a Catholic cleric came up with, that being the Big Bang Theory.  Catholics generally love science.

So what's the problem here?

Well stem cells.

If you read the entry above you'll see that at least one of the vaccines was developed using stem cells at some point, but at the same time neither of the current ones used stem cells from a directly aborted baby.  Given this, the Bishop of Cheyenne has given them a pass.

But the fact that this letter was issued also means that somebody had a question about it and it had to be addressed.

This isn't a majority of Catholic Bishops, we'd note.  Whatever happened (the Jesuit magazine America claims it was due to misinformation regarding the vaccines) at least two American Bishops issued statements that condemned at least one of the vaccines. This lead to a corrective memo being issued by the United States Conference for Catholic Bishops which addressed that issue, which reads much the letter that is set out above. The vaccines are okay.  The memo also apparently cited to a pro life organization that termed the vaccines as ethically uncontroversial.

The British Catholic Bishops went further and urged their flock to get the vaccines, noting that getting them was "not a sin".

In contrast, Auxiliary Bishop Athanasius Schneider of Kazakhstan declared the vaccines morally impermissible.  And this is what makes this sort of peculiarly interesting.  

Bishop Schneider is a traditionalist and is well known in traditionalist circles.  He's an opponent of much of what was derived from Vatican II and is very outspoken.

Now, Catholics in the Diocese of Cheyenne are not obligated to follow the pronouncements of Bishop Schneider that are contrary to those of Bishop Biegler.  The Bishop in your diocese, in the Catholic order of things, is the one that you need to pay attention to on certain things and can rely upon in others.  Catholics owe their diocesan Bishop a degree of loyalty.  If you are in a diocese in which the Bishop has said its morally impermissible to receive the vaccine, you can't simply just ignore that.

But in the current Internet Fueled Age considering the views of our local Bishop has become less common in areas in which people want to pick and choose their beliefs.  Trad or Rad Trad Catholics latch on to statements like those from Bishop Schneider that fit their views and will reject them over their own Bishop.

Indeed, this has the odd impact of distorting the Catholic order pretty significantly.  Even well into the mid 20th Century Catholics were much more in tune with what their own Bishops had to say than what the Pope might be doing.  The Pope was far away and the Bishop was fairly near.  This reflected the order of the Church.  On day to day matters in the Catholic world, the Bishop was likely to be the one that Catholics heard from.

But now many Catholics tend to follow the Pope almost as if he was present in the local parish.  In reality, what the parish Priest is doing tends to be immediately important to Catholics real lives more than what the Pope may be doing, on a daily basis. But if you read Catholic commentary now, particularly that of Trads and Rad Trads, you'd get the other view.

And not completely without reason. This Pope has been upsetting to orthodox Catholics.  But that in turn as fueled a sort of hyper orthodoxy that predated Pope Francis.

I'm expecting that to develop here.

As for what I'm doing, vaccination wise, I'm receiving it as soon as I conceivably can, and I'm an orthodox Catholic.

And I think there may be another moral issue afloat here.  In this day and age there's a massive amount of scientific bogosity that's circulating in society and many Americans, at least, have come down to believing things that are absolutely false.  Indeed, on this issue, the irony is that there will be some Trads that will abstain from receiving the vaccine due to having views that are supported by pronouncement of Bishops like Bishop Schneider, who have a bit of a fan following, while other rank and file Protestant and non religious Americans will abstain as they've bought off on the blatherings of anti vaxer boob model Jenny McCarthy and her fellow travelers.

We'll deal with the strange era of anti scientific thought elsewhere on one of our companion blogs, but on an issue like this, for sincere Catholics, the issue thus becomes this.  If it takes 70% of the population to become immune from a virus to achieve "herd immunity", and if we now that the virus kills, if we refuse to participate in achieving herd immunity, are we morally complicit to some degree in unnecessary deaths?

*One of my favorite examples was one of Cromwell's lieutenants who fought to prosecute the Anglican Church and the Catholic Church but who asked for, and received, permission for his mistress to be in prison with him rather than his wife.  Granted, Crowwell's people were generally very serious Calvinist who believed in double predestination, something most who claim to be Calvinist today do not, but that's really taking that a bit far.

On the ongoing dispensation for Mass attendance

The Bishop of Cheyenne has continued his disposition to attend Mass due to the Coronavirus Pandemic.  His decree on the same is here:

First of all, I'm going to be blunt.  The Diocese of Cheyenne has done a remarkably bad job during the Coronavirus Pandemic in getting the news out on anything.  

Bad.

The Diocese seems to be of the view that Catholics in this state all check the web all the time, will log into parish websites, or maybe are in some sort of day to day communication with the parish.

St. Mary's Cathedral, Cheyenne.

They aren't.

Some are, and I can vouch for that as I was once on a Parish Council. There's a group of dedicated parishioners who are in constant contact with the Priest and their parishes, but there are a lot who very much are not.

Indeed, one of the real ironies in all of this is that Bishop Steven Biegler, who has only been in that position for a couple of years, has a fairly apparent interests in trying to reach Hispanic Catholics, who very much need to be reached.  But to understand why we have so many Hispanic Catholics here, you also have to understand that we have a high transient population, much of which is based in the oilfield.  I defended the depositions of two Mexican oilfield workers just a couple of weeks ago, and this is common.  My guess is that the Hispanic population itself here has dramatically reduced in numbers over the past year, due to the oilfield depression, but be that as it may, I am extremely doubtful that Hispanic parishioners are going to be reached by their logging into the website of the Diocese or their Parish.

To add to that, neither are a lot of average parishioners.  I haven't been contacted even once during the pandemic and I was a Parish Council member up until just before it hit, which also was just before the last Priest rotation.  My guess is that I'm probably not on the active Parish roles anymore even though its my home Parish, as I started attending an across town Parish (I'm equidistant from all the Parishes in town) when the Mass schedule was changed as part of an evident effort to make it more convenient for Hispanic parishioners.  I'm not complaining about that change, as its clear to me that they need to be reached, but when I switched where I normally go, I also started making my donations there, as I was there.   As other family members also attend there, and as its a parish that I've attended at various points in the past (as I noted its just as close as my home parish, in terms of time of travel), they recognized me pretty quickly.

I suppose my overall point is is that I have had for a long time a vague feeling that Bishops don't always understand their Diocese very well.  Our current Bishop is from South Dakota, a neighboring state, and that cuts against my argument.  The prior one was from Wisconsin and a farmer by background, and a hunter, so he did have a grasp of the nature of where he was and seemed to appreciate that (he's now in Alaska).  But cutting against that, it seems to me, are the seeming assumptions that everyone knows what is going on and everyone is checking in.  Those sorts of parishes sound more like the ones the Priests on Catholic Stuff You Should Know discuss in Denver, rather than here, but maybe that's just me.

Even if it is just me, somebody should be reaching out.  That isn't happening locally.

And as evidence of that, I only learned about the continued dispensation as the old one was running out, I think, on December 15, and I logged on a couple of weeks ago to see if my recollection was correct.  To my surprise, it had been continued.

You'd have thought that there would have been an effort to reach out to people about this.  

If there was, it didn't reach me.

So hence my complaint.

I'll further note that I was not happy with the churches closing in the first place.  I'll admit now that my view was wrong.  I was also very much unhappy with the suspension of all sacraments, which has been lifted.  I don't think completely suspending Confession the way that itw as done was the right thing to do and I don't think it should have been done.  I was nearly as glad to see the ban on Confessions lifted as I was to see Masses restored, as odd as that may seem.

When Masses were restored I started going again, but as the pandemic heated back up, I dropped back out the last few weeks. Hence the reason for my checking.

During this crisis I've learned that I miss Mass for sure and as a lifelong Catholic I've come to admire, as odd as that may seem, dedicated Protestants and Orthodox who go every Sunday not because of a church law but because they choose too. And when things opened back up, and I could go, I chose to.  My suspension the last couple of weeks is because I'm one of those folks who have "conditions".

I'm in good health, but I had asthma pretty severely as a kid and it resumed after I went to law school for a period of time. When I was a kid I had to take shots weekly, or maybe it was biweekly, for what seemed like years, although the way such recollections work probably means it was not as great of period of time as I recall.  The shots made things less worse, but not better.  Fall was always a period of agony for me until I went to university the first time, and then they oddly left for the most par.  I was aware that allergies could come and go, but I didn't expect it to occur to me.*  I was very glad they had.

And then they returned when I was in law school.  Pretty severely, in fact, and to some plant pollens I'd never been allergic to before.  That caused me to have to resort to shots once again.

That helped clear things up for years, and indeed the allergies mostly seemed to go away.  Here a couple of years ago we got a dog for the first time in our long marriage, and it was a breed advertised as hypoallergenic.  It really seems to be.  Before that, we obtained a cat as well, which we had for years.  He simply moved in.

Having the cat caused me to believe that my animal allergies, which were widespread, had likely vanished.  Cats are one of the things that I knew for certain that I was allergic to.  Prior to getting the dog I went in to be tested and, nope, all the things I'd ever been allergic to, I still am.

Why aren't I reacting to them?

I have no idea.

I do know that in the fall in a bad year I'll get sick.  I generally recognize what it is, but frankly it's very difficult to determine at the onset if its a cold, severe cold, allergies, or severe allergies.  Long experience lets me generally guess right.  Usually I only have to worry about this in the fall, as noted, and some falls, like this past one, not at all.  Usually during the winter I'll experience some mild allergy symptoms all year long, which I think is due to working in a building that's over 100 years old. There's something in it, and when its really locked up and airtight, that gets to me.  I can tell that's not a cold.

One of the things about having had a fairly pronounced asthma condition is that if you've had it, and probably early on before you knew you had it, you may very well have experienced nearly dying.  Some asthmatics experience that repeatedly.  I have.  The experience is something nearly unique to asthmatics and its something that psychologist state that they rarely will describe to anyone.  There's good reason for that, one being that its nearly indescribable.  

The best actual description I've ever seen is set out in the book Mornings On Horseback, which is about Theodore Roosevelt's youth.  TR was a severe asthmatic as a kid.  The description is right on.  What is hard to relate about it is that when a severe attack sets in you reach a point where you know that you are in real trouble and you are headed for death.  It's pretty obvious.  When you pull back out and recover you are exhausted, but also, oddly, euphoric, as you've cheated death.  Those who have been asthmatics for a period of time, if they're conditions is serious, have experienced that again and again.

You also really learn to avoid what is trying to kill you like nothing else.

Which brings me back around to this.  

Nobody ever recovers from an injury or affliction, really.  If you've had some sort of severe condition, its' done its damage.  Asthmatics that were well treated as kids usually have overcome it in part because they've been forced to develop their bodies.  It's an oddity for sure, but at 57 years old I'm in a lot better shape than most 57 years old, a byproduct in part of the way our family has always lived but also in part due to my parents making sure I was active when I was young, mostly in swimming which is a good sport for asthmatics.  But nonetheless, if you get a severe cold or flu, you remember the condition of your youth.  When the wheezes stats to set in you recall what it was like and that death was always right around the corner.  "Feeling poorly?" comes the question.  "Having a hard time breathing" comes the answer.  But in reality, you're laying on the sofa and death is in the chair across the room, you know it.

Most asthmatics also tend to become fairly fatalistic. There are those who claim that people can't imagine their own deaths and don't ever really accept that it will occur.  I think that's baloney, and in reality what that might mean is pampered modern Americans can't imagine it and always imagine that in their 80s they'll really be in their 30s, but people who have had asthma can.  Death has come and saddled you up on his horse plenty of times, and then simply dropped you back off.  You know that one day he's coming again and won't let ago.

Generally we don't hope that's earlier than it needs to be, and hence why I've sat out the past few weeks.**

I frankly feel horrible about it and I don't think I personally do well without going to Mass and experiencing Christ in the Mass.  I don't do well with alternatives. I'm hoping this is all over very soon.

I guess I understand the continuation of the dispensation, although at this point it frankly isn't worded very clearly.  It seems we have a dispensation, and I think that my concerns qualify me for it, but it almost seems to be a qualified dispensation.

But at this point, somebody really needs to reach out.  

*Indeed one of the features of having severe allergies is not only this mystery, but the common misunderstandings about it.  I retain allergies, but I've endured a lecture from a person at one time who insisted that all childhood allergies vanish, something you can't tell somebody for whom they have not vanished.

**Which brings me to hypocrisy.  I've gone in to work the entire time, which seems hypocritical, but I've also tried to avoid contact as much as possible with as many people as possible.

Churches of the East: Justices lift New York’s COVID-related attendance ...

Churches of the East: Justices lift New York’s COVID-related attendance ...:   Justices lift New York’s COVID-related attendance limits on worship services

Centennial Postponed

St. Anthony of Padua Church in Casper, Wyoming was dedicated in August, 1920.  It had planned to celebrate that event this August.

And then COVID 19 struck:

THE 100-YEAR CELEBRATION
For The Dedication of St.
Anthony's Church Building has been
POSTPONEÐ
Due to the requirements mandated from The Health Department and the limited gathering size, the Celebration Committee moved the event to next summer with the hope more people will feel comfortable attending and the requirement of everyone needing to wear a face mask won’t exist. This will make it a more enjoyable time to celebrate the church where it all began for our Catholic Community.
We wish to thank the following sponsors for their commitment to this event, and
Thank you to all who have supported, planned, and used their time and talents on this project. Stay tuned, we will be back in 2021.

Communion and the State. Wyoming dictates how the faithful will receive and what that reveals about what people understand and don't understand.

St. Mary's Cathedral in Cheyenne, Wyoming.

We've been unusually active here in an unusual way, for this blog, since the COVID 19 Pandemic struck.  The reason is obvious.  Churches, like every other institution, have been greatly impacted by the Pandemic.

Well, not like every other institution.  While its seemingly easy for some to forget, including civil authorities, a church isn't like a restaurant or a bar or something, and particularly depending upon a person's faith, the closure of religious services, and services mean more than just a Sunday gathering, can not only be problematic, but traumatic, and even dire, in their consequences.

This is particularly so for the Apostolic Churches, those being, for those who might not be familiar with the term, the Catholic and Orthodox Churches.  The Apostolic Churches have a relationship with their clergy that Protestant Christians do not.  Members of the Apostolic faiths depending upon the clergy for administration of the sacraments.  Nobody but an ordained cleric, and more specifically in terms of the Apostolic faiths, a cleric who can trace his ordination through a Bishop who was one of the Apostles, can deliver the sacraments.  We've gone into this elsewhere and will forgo doing so here, but we'd note that the closure of Catholic and Orthodox Churches during the pandemic is, therefore, uniquely problematic for Apostolic Christians.

Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Church, Casper Wyoming.

Those closures are not, contrary to what has been repeatedly claimed during this crisis, fully unparallelled.  Churches were in fact closed during the 1918-1919 Influenza Pandemic, although I do not know for how long.  A review of period newspapers demonstrates this to be the case.  Therefore, those numerous, mostly heavily Traditional, voices that claim "Catholics have never been denied the sacraments" aren't fully correct when they mean that church doors have not been closed due to disease before.  Moreover, while I haven't researched it, I'm fairly confident, just from having run across references here and there, that churches of all types have been closed before due to local pandemics.  Indeed, something we've forgotten, as we always view our own times as fully analogous to the past, is that epidemics were once quite common.

While I don't know the situation in the Orthodox Churches, closures have been controversial, as noted, in some Catholic quarters and have resulted in petitions to Bishops to open things back up. At least for the most part those petitions have not resulted in changes, but churches are now actually beginning to open up.  Some Protestant churches that closed early on have actually reopened in slight defiance, as they're usually only a little bit ahead of changes in local orders, to state quarantine commands.  I think I've read of one Catholic one doing so, and I saw a reference, but didn't follow up on it, to at least one SSPX chapel doing so, although as Catholics know or should know the relationship between the SSPX and the Church is problematic.  At least one diocese in New Mexico did reopen public Masses, and while there was concern, it was not in defiance of a closure order.

Which brings us to Wyoming, which is providing an interesting example of how things may develop and how that could be really odd, if not problematic, for Catholics and Orthodox Christians.

The Catholic and Orthodox Churches recognize seven sacraments, those being baptism, Communion (receiving the Holy Eucharist), confirmation, reconciliation (confession of sins), anointing of the sick, marriage and holy orders. 

The Seven Sacraments, altarpiece, 1450.  Sacraments are depicted being administered, from left to right, are baptism, confirmation, confession, Communion (center panel), holy orders, marriage and anointing of the sick.

The way the sacraments are administered and received is fairly poorly understood by non Catholics as well as Catholics.  Baptism, for example, is a sacrament which the Catholic Church recognizes can be conferred by non Catholics upon non Catholics and which remains perfectly valid.*  A Christian baptized in another church is never "rebaptized" if the person later becomes Catholic and even laymen can validly baptize a person although the baptism is illicit unless done in a dire emergency.

Somewhat similarly, it requires a priest to perform a valid marriage if one of the parties being married is a Catholic, but due to Canon Law, not due to the nature of marriage. The Church didn't always routinely witness marriages but came to do so to protect the parties, particularly the female party.  Now all marriages involving Catholics, with some exceptions, must be performed by a priest, but not all marriages are sacramental, as both parties must be baptized Christians in order for that to occur.

Confirmation in the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church is normally performed by a Bishop, but for the Orthodox and the Eastern Rite its normally administered contemporaneously at baptism by the priest.  Confessions can only be heard by a priest.  Anointing of the sick can likewise only be done by a priest.  Holy Orders, i.e., ordaining of priests and deacons, can only be done by Bishops.

And consecration of the Eucharist can only be done by a priest in the Apostolic Churches.  The same position is taken by those churches closely based on the Apostolic Churches, such as the churches in the Anglican Communion and the Lutheran Church.

Communion in the desert during World War Two. This is likely an Anglican priest, give as these are British soldiers.

All of these churches have a very distinct view of what the Eucharist is, and they believe it is the real body and blood of Christ, not a symbol. They don't all agree on what exactly the nature of Host is, as there's at least a difference in understanding between the Apostolic Churches and the Lutheran Church, and determining what various churches in the Anglican Communion believe is a bit difficult at times, but by and large they all agree that only a priest or pastor can consecrate a Host.

What various Protestant dominions, outside the ones we just mentioned, believe about their communions, and most of them have one, varies, but quite a few simply view it as a symbol.  Many of these have communion only occasionally as a result, with a much different understanding of what is occuring. And, for that matter, the Apostolic Churches and those closely based on it would regard those other churches as unable to validly consecrate a Host in any event, and therefore likewise agree that in those churches, as opposed to in their church, it is a symbol.

Depiction of a Protestant Communion.

Which brings us to the recent order by the Governor of the State of Wyoming.

Wyoming is opening up its churches, with restrictions.  Those provisions are here:

Those are, of course, all the provisions.  The one that brings in our post here is 4(g), which states:

Communion shall be served in individual containers.

The really remarkable thing here is that a state order purports to direct how Communion will be received. 

I'm not a Canon Lawyer, but this provision strikes me as impossible for the Apostolic Churches to comply with.

Indeed, as should be evident by the discussion set out above, Communion, while it happens in every Mass, is a major matter for Apostolic Churches.  Apostolic Churches that aren't in communion with each other have rules about the reception of Communion by members of the other churches.  I.e., Catholic Churches will allow Orthodox Christians to receive Communion in a Catholic Church, but in most places its discouraged so as to not offend the Orthodox. The Orthodox, in contrast, are very reluctant to allow Catholics to receive Communion in their churches and in some cases simply won't allow it.  Neither the Catholic Churches or the Orthodox will allow those outside of the Catholic and Orthodox churches to receive Communion except under specific circumstances.  

Recipients of Communion must not be bearing unforgiven mortal sins.  

At least Catholics are obligated to receive Communion at least once a year, although most receive it much more frequently than that, and some daily.  Most adherent Orthodox are like most Catholics and receive it weekly.

The method of reception of the Holy Eucharist is very prescribed and actually subject to debate among Catholics.  For most of recent history Latin Rite Catholics, and those Protestants whose faiths are closely based on the Latin Rite, received Communion on the tongue, delivered by the priest.  Up until the 1960s, this usually meant that they received it kneeling at an alter rail with a Communion Plate held below the receiving person to catch the consecrated Host if it was dropped.  Following Vatican II, this was changed as alter rails came out of many churches, a sad development in that many were beautiful works of art, and the communicants then received on the tongue by going up to the priest, receiving standing as a rule.  Starting at some time in the 70s or 80s, actually as an act of odd disobedience to the rubics, Catholics in many places, including the United States, started receiving in the hand, which has become a matter or heated Trad debate.  It is perfectly valid, and as its defenders will note, was the method often used in the early Church, something Trads typically ignore.

Also in the 80s the Latin Rite in North America reintroduced the reception by the parishioners of the consecrated wine, the Precious Blood, although a Catholic is not obligated to receive both forms.  Most do.

In the Eastern Rite and the Orthodox the consecrated bread and wine are mixed and then served, with a tiny spoon that is turned to provide the reception, on the communicants tongue.

There's no earthly way to do this with individual containers.

Indeed, individual containers will strike members of Apostolic Churches as the oddest thought.  It even suggest that the reception  might be taken home, which the Apostolic Churches strictly forbid except in rare specific circumstances.  

So effectively, the Governor of Wyoming has forbid Communion.

I don't know what religion Governor Gordon is.  He want to an Episcopal boarding school while young, but that may mean less than it at first seems. The assumption that a person going to a denomination's school means they are members is a common one, but its never a completely safe assumption.  He and his first wife were married in a Congregationalist Church, which is a church with substantially different theology than the Episcopal Church.  I don't know if that means that he became a member of that church, or if he's a non defined Protestant, something that's very common these days, or if he was and remains an Episcopalian.  

If he is an Episcopalian, his order certainly creates a problem for the traditional branch of his co-religious.  Maybe that doesn't matter to Gordon, who might figure that safety first dictates this approach.  Or maybe he doesn't grasp the religious nature of the topic the way that Catholics and Orthodox will.  Or maybe he's just signing an order, one of a seemingly endless series these days, that come across his desk addressing a lot of topics in a time of crisis.

In any event, it presents an interesting example of how various Christians don't understand each others faiths, and beyond that, it makes Communion impossible for a body of Christians that takes its Sunday obligation extremely seriously.