Latest Breaking News

yankeepants

(1,979 posts)

2. Yes Northern NY. Andy Knows from whence he speaks

Thu Nov 26, 2020, 11:29 PM

Nov 2020

CORONAVIRUS LATEST / Get the latest news from 7 News on the coronavirus by clicking here

NEWS
Attendees of St. Peter’s church service in Lowville last Sunday quarantined after positive test

Church services, COVID-19 (Source: MGN)
By 7 News Staff | November 26, 2020 at 5:30 PM EST - Updated November 26 at 5:30 PM
LOWVILLE, N.Y. (WWNY) - Everyone who attended the 11 a.m. mass at St. Peter’s Catholic Church on Shady Avenue last Sunday are now in quarantine due to a potential exposure to COVID-19.

In a message posted to the church’s website, an asymptomatic person who attended the service tested positive for COVID-19.

According to the message, the church did take down names and phone numbers of everyone in attendance to make the contact tracing process easier.

“Precautions were taken at Mass with masks, social distancing, and hand sanitizer. The risk remains very low but it still means lives are going to be disrupted for the next two weeks for a number of us,” said Father James W Seymour.

Both Father Seymour and Father Jude C. Nnadibuagha are in quarantine.

The message did not specify how many people were in attendance.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

44 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Cuomo Attacks Supreme Court, but Virus Ruling Is Warning to Governors [View all] ancianita Nov 2020 OP

What religions require you to go to church to practice them? sboatcar Nov 2020 #1

Depends. Some churches admit that members can practice their knowledge of the difference ancianita Nov 2020 #3

Biden speaks well on this issue.. ananda Nov 2020 #20

Yes Northern NY. Andy Knows from whence he speaks yankeepants Nov 2020 #2

How did they know who the asymptomatic person was. ancianita Nov 2020 #4

Perhaps a mandatory job-related test? Routine doc appointment? Pre-dental? yankeepants Nov 2020 #5

Right? One would think that church leaders would require those, or at least a temperature ancianita Nov 2020 #7

But temp checks don't screen out wnylib Nov 2020 #30

Definitely on separation of church and state! ananda Nov 2020 #23

As a New Yorker, I feel my Gov is doing an excellent job despite his yankeepants Nov 2020 #6

He is. But it's a question of whose rights prevail -- those who are religious or everyone else's. ancianita Nov 2020 #11

SCOTUS shouldn't have even taken this case.. mountain grammy Nov 2020 #8

Not a lawyer, I'd agree it's a state decision, but then the plaintiffs claim national standing. ancianita Nov 2020 #9

Wasn't there ANOTHER multi thousand person wedding of a rabbi's BigmanPigman Nov 2020 #10

Yes. And Cuomo publicly addressed this in a previous public briefing. ancianita Nov 2020 #12

I am steaming mad! BigmanPigman Nov 2020 #14

Harry Litman? He's an attorney, not a constitutional lawyer. Anyone can claim to ancianita Nov 2020 #15

Unless we end gerrymandering angrychair Nov 2020 #29

gerrymandering is not at fault here. A state is going to have the same number of yellowdogintexas Nov 2020 #32

I watched some videos of those weddings and I couldn't believe how huge the crowds were yellowdogintexas Nov 2020 #33

I never even knew these events took place BigmanPigman Nov 2020 #35

We live in a country where religion is elevated over science. Yavin4 Nov 2020 #13

Agree. According to Justice Roberts, belief numbers aren't as protected as human health numbers. ancianita Nov 2020 #16

And we can attribute it to Nixon's Southern Strategy. Initech Nov 2020 #17

This decision is contrary to the establishment clause nuxvomica Nov 2020 #18

One is moved to ask how they would rule over actions like those of Amon Bundy, David Koresh, Ford_Prefect Nov 2020 #19

God is not going to protect the people the SCOTUS has condemned to death in this decision RVN VET71 Nov 2020 #21

anyone else already sick of this "christo-Taliban on the Potomac" shit? bringthePaine Nov 2020 #22

I have been for years. roamer65 Nov 2020 #39

I only feel sorry for llashram Nov 2020 #24

The restrictions are temporary The Wizard Nov 2020 #25

Or until a big D Dem Congress moves to restructure it -- 13 justices for 13 federal districts. ancianita Nov 2020 #26

Nothing like a nice stuffy church as a prelude to a nice stuffy ventilator bucolic_frolic Nov 2020 #27

...or a nice stuffy coffin or cremation chamber. roamer65 Nov 2020 #38

what the SC just did azureblue Nov 2020 #28

It's now a Rethuglicon Supreme Court and they are a death cult . Many more will die because of their geretogo Nov 2020 #31

after biden is in office send in the police rdking647 Nov 2020 #34

I really hope this brings about the demonization of religious extremism. roamer65 Nov 2020 #36

King James Matt 18:20 Turbineguy Nov 2020 #37

What exactly are you trying to say. ancianita Nov 2020 #40

According to Jesus Turbineguy Nov 2020 #42

Shame on the NYT (and others) for misrepresenting the decision Ms. Toad Nov 2020 #41

Thank you for the clarification. ancianita Nov 2020 #43

This decision was about the collection plate not about freedom of speech. iemitsu Nov 2020 #44