How far is too far?

In late April of this year, the first warnings of the H1N1 Flu virus first hit the public media, concentrated in Mexico. In an effort to protect as many people as possible from this virus, Catholic parishes in this diocese were asked to implement a set of preventative measures which will remain in effect until we are advised that the threat of infection has passed.

Just a few weeks ago, the World Health Organization raised the worldwide pandemic alert attached to the H1N1 virus to Level 6 in response to the ongoing global spread of this virus. A phase 6 designation indicates that a global pandemic is underway, and as a result, churches and other organizations who must interact with the general public must be vigilent to do what we can to prevent the further spread of the disease.

Most people who we interact with are now aware of this epidemic, and although there have been more than 7000 cases reported in Canada, there are still some in our midst who appear to pay little or no heed to the health concerns of others.

I found myself in the midst of this battle this week when confronted with a group of parishioners who insisted on receiving Communion on the tongue, despite the warnings not to do so issued by the Bishop of the diocese. Their insistence caused me at first to react negatively to their request, in the interest of public safety and of upholding the precautionary measures we have put in place over these past two months, but no amount of reasoning would deter them from their quest.

After discussing this situation with the bishop himself, I was asked to find a way to respond pastorally to this expressed desire, while doing what I can to maintain the health safety of all concerned. The solution: I asked the parties concerned to approach at the end of the communion line, therefore there would be no other persons risking contamination after they had received, and I could then proceed directly to a disinfection station to purify my hands before continuing with the rest of the Mass.

Decisions like this are never to be made easily, but the fact that the preventative measures have not been adopted universally even within this country, leave lots of room for confusion on the part of those who move with relative liquidity from one parish to another, and even from one diocese to the next.

Even my own relucance to respond to a phone message left by the persons in question gave me pause to consider that as one entrusted with a postion of trust by so many, I needed to answer this request, but I needed to be wise about how I implemented any such decision. There is a part of me that I would like to believe has grown through this confrontation. If in some measure, this means that I've been able to find a solution that responds to the ligitimate concerns of others who hunger for the bread of life, then I must be content to accept this as another growing experience (albeit one that has stretched me once again in ways that I could never have imagined just a few weeks ago).

Personally, I am deeply grateful to those who have agreed to offer valuable advise about the benefits and shortcomings of this decision. There is still a question or a wondering within my heart though: Will this decision be seen as an act of compassion and love, as it is meant to be understood, or will it simply remain in the realm of a victory that has been won?