*3.1. The Secularist–Rationalist Viewpoint: Holy Communion as "Religious Obscurantism"*

Speaking in ideal-typical terms, social agents who hold to a secular, rational morality and a liberal or progressive political orientation are critical towards religious values and practices, especially when the latter exert influence in the public, secular sphere. This perspective is driven in large part by an attitude shared by these agents that considers religion as a private issue that must concern only the existential–spiritual needs of the believers and avoid incursions into the public affairs of the culture in domains, such as politics, education, law, or, in the case at hand, health policy. It is hardly surprising, therefore, that on the issue of Holy Communion, secular–rationalists establish a clear line of demarcation between faith and science, urging the Church to restrict its sphere of activity to the care of the human soul and leave the treatment of body and related public policy decisions to science (Tountas 2020). By extension, they call for a broader scope of justified health policy interventions into religious communities with the argument that the common good (public health) must precede the particular commitments and ritual practices of the religious subsystem. With respect to the current pandemic crisis and the challenge of viral transmission, secularists have argued that with respect to social policy implementation, there are no "exceptions for religious, liturgical or metaphysical reasons"3 (Federation of Hospital Unions Doctors of Greece 2020).

In this context, the use of a common liturgical spoon during the pandemic was presented as a public health threat. Labeling opposing views as "unacceptable, obscurantist, and DANGEROUS!" (Imerodromos 2020), the secularists framed the issue as a battle between the proponents of "scientific truth" and the forces of "obscurantism" and "metaphysics" (Federation of Hospital Unions Doctors of Greece 2020; Imerodromos 2020). At the same time, they urged scientific associations to take a clear position against the current method of Holy Communion. The implication is that the state must, for reasons of public health, impose restrictions over this religious practice as long as such practice is construed as a pandemic risk, or until Church officials opt for safer modes of distributing Holy Communion.

The case in point concerns the imposition by The Federal Republic of Germany of a temporary ban on the distribution of Holy Communion from a common spoon. Greek Orthodox Metropolitan Augoustinos of Germany abided by this measure, albeit stating that this was the "most painful and difficult decision" he has ever taken (Augoustinos 2020). Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew's response on this issue appeals to a classic balance of power to set limits. Drawing on Jesus' famous saying: "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's", the Patriarch recognized the authority of the state to regulate its own affairs, but at the same time, he highlighted the "holy and indestructible right" of the Church to "organize its ecclesiastical life and to celebrate the Holy Sacraments (Mysteries) according to its canonical and ecclesiological tradition" (Augoustinos 2020). In various respects, the modern, secular state has the power to impose restrictions, even on core aspects of religious life, as this ban clearly proves. However, in predominantly Orthodox majority countries, such as Greece, such strict restrictions were not entertained by the church leadership and not pushed unflinchingly by the government because of competing religious commitments of the majority of its population and the high political cost such a position would have exacted on politicians and church leaders.
