News flash. Priests do get stipends for celebrating Mass.
A priest MIGHT receive a stipend for offering a particular Mass in remembrance of someone, but the priest would still offer the same Mass if no such offering were made.
The Mass is not, in any way whatsoever, conditional upon the stipend. Furthermore, there is no expectation
whatsoever of a stipend.
I agree that abuses such as you describe were once, unfortunately, common. Priests would say many “extra” Masses to benefit from the stipends. This is one reason why the Council of Trent imposed strict limits upon how may times a priest may offer Mass each day. One of my brother’s seminary instructors told the class that any priest may binate (ie, say Mass two times a day). With a bishop’s approval for reasons of pastoral necessity, a priest may trinate. But, under no circumstances is a priest to fornicate.
It’s nice to know that Benedictine seminary instructors have a sense of humor
Pretty much every single Mass a priest celebrates has an intention with a stipend attached.
I’ve heard that many Masses celebrated by Religious will often have particular intentions (with associated stipends). These intentions are sometimes announced. In most cases, the priest does not personally receive the stipend (it goes to his Order).
My brother (a diocesan priest) infrequently celebrates a Mass of remembrance for a particular intention (with a stipend).
However, as the Celebrant, he is also free to bring any number of private intentions to the Altar. He asked his seminary instructor what was the difference, and the instructor could not provide any specific answer.
The distinction is that the person making the donation for the stipend is not paying the priest to celebrate the sacrament, but rather to pray for the requested intention. And parishes frequently assess stipends for baptisms, weddings and funerals.
I would be very interested to know of ANY parish or ANY priest who asks a stipend for
Baptism. Can you give me a link to a website?
Also, I am not so sure you can place Baptism above the Eucharist in the hierarchy of a priest’s duties.
Well, let me put it this way. Without Baptism, there would BE NO EUCHARIST. Eucharist would not even be
possible.
Without Baptism, there would be no priests, and there would be no Bishops.
Even a deacon, or in an emergency a layperson, can baptize validly.
This is true. But the
ordinary minister of Baptism is a priest or Bishop. A deacon is considered a delegate of the priest (who may operate only with a priest’s approval), and a layperson is considered an extraordinary minister (who may operate only in matters of grave necessity).
Baptisms in my parish are frequently delegated to the deacons, so how necessary is it to have a priest doing them?
It’s not. My second child was Baptized by a deacon in a monthly “Baptismal service” apart from a regular Mass.
But I have never heard of a priest presiding over such a service. I believe that, when a priest Baptizes, he does so within a Mass (there’s an extension in the GIRM for a Baptismal Mass).
The OP asked about stipends for
priests performing Baptism. I said that this is
never expected or appropriate. Feel free to correct me.
I would say that a priest’s fundamental duties are to offer the Eucharistic sacrifice as well as hearing Confessions and anointing the sick. These are three duties that simply can’t be delegated or done by anyone else without sacerdotal ordination.
I think you are confusing “fundamental” with “necessary.” A priest’s most
fundamental duty is to make people Christian (through Baptism). If he doesn’t do that then he cannot administer any other Sacrament to them.
A priest may readily delegate this duty to a deacon. That reduces a priest’s necessity, but it does not reduce his fundamental duty (which he is not neglecting, but delegating).
