I saw an amusing story that about a pastor in California, where the hypocritical pols have restricted church services under the excuse of being non-essential during the Wuhan Devil DEATH WAVE but have left strip clubs open because they are, you know, essential.

This pastor turned his church into a “strip club” by stripping off his neck tie during a service. Hence, strip club. Hence, they should be able to remain open. Amusing and clever.

But wait!

We priests have been strippers during Mass for centuries. Apart from Good Friday, when we strip off our vestments and even our shoes, there is every Sunday, at least where the Traditional Latin Mass is celebrated.

Here is a video.



About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Lighter fare and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. GHP says:

    Phew ….(heavy breathing) …… class act!


  2. PanOrganista says:

    To say nothing of the stripping of the maniple and chasuble to preach.

  3. Nighthawk says:

    Also to say nothing of the use of Folded Chasubles (and their doffing/donning) at solemn Masses of the season starting Sunday!

  4. WVC says:

    I think Babylon Bee had a satire(?) on a church installing slot machines in the lobby so they could stay open in Nevada.

    On a serious note, though, the stripping of the altars after Mass on Holy Thursday is one of the most striking, poignant, powerful moments of the whole liturgical year.

  5. iamlucky13 says:

    I had not seen any news explaining this prior to Father’s post, but I could guess what it was about, based on judicial history in other states on the west coast that certain forms of dancing qualify as artistic expression and are a form of protected speech.

    For others who may have missed it, numerous counties in California have emergency public health orders prohibiting live entertainment. Two specific adult entertainment venues sued, and were granted an injunction against enforcement of the bans on the grounds that the orders deprived them of due process. I don’t actually see the 1st amendment mentioned in the reporting on this case, so the scope to consider for precedence is extremely broad.

    Meanwhile, 95% of California’s population lives in counties where the highest level of restrictions are in place, including that only outdoor religious services are allowed.

    As I see it, the main purpose of emergency orders is, in effect, to deprive the people of due process temporarily, for sufficient reason. The California ruling seems to undermine the very nature of their emergency order laws, especially if was not construed to apply specifically to protected activities.

    Given that the free exercise of religion is a protected activity, any church that wanted to sue on the grounds should find it even easier to get an injunction.

Comments are closed.