However, I think central to the thread topic is whether the number of times per day one may receive is based on a canonical day versus a liturgical day.
Dr. Peters and Fr Z take the position the canons referencing number of times the faithful may receive the Eucharist are referring to a canonical day, midnight to midnight
You seem to be taking the position it’s referring to a liturgical day, which you posit is something other than midnight to midnight on Sundays and Solemnities.
(edited to stay within the 6000 character limit).
I see it as applying to the liturgical day. I know that some will disagree with that, some of them being experts in the field. I know this. I merely (again, merely) disagree.
I’m not entirely convinced that the priest you mentioned does disagree. I do not know (emphasis here: I do not know). I know what he wrote about a person receiving 3 times in a liturgical day of Sunday (one evening, 2 the next day), but I see that as subtly different from the question of twice on Sat. morning and once on Sat. evening. I do believe that there is some room for 2 possible answers here, a different answer, each addressing the different questions.
My justification for using the standard of the liturgical day is that when I read the Church documents on this subject from the 20th century, I consistently see that same standard being applied. I read Church documents which state that a person who has already received Communion the maximum times for Saturday is not to be excluded from receiving Communion at the Saturday evening Mass—even though (at the time) there was no actual change made to the law to permit this.
I read documents from the Church that treat receiving Communion at an evening Mass and receiving at a Mass the next morning as being a repetition of Communion on the same day (and permitting this, to a max of 2).
Using the interpretation of a liturgical day is not so far-fetched as some might think. There is ample precedent for it. Most importantly, the interpretation that follows the liturgical day is the one that most harmonizes the Code of Canon Law with the liturgical law and with the value that all laws are “for the good of souls.”
It is the interpretation that the Church is consistent in Her teaching, practice, and laws. It is the interpretation that recognizes the simple fact that since the Church already tells us that everything pertaining to the Mass of Sunday on Saturday evening pertains to Sunday, then there is nothing unreasonable about doing exactly that and recognizing & applying the principle that “whatever pertains to the whole pertains to every part of the whole.” In conclusion (to this part) if I interpret the “part of that whole” (Communion) in the same way that I interpret the “whole” (the entire Mass).
That is the point I have been trying to make over and again as this topic appears here on CAF. My response to the question essentially comes down to (and rests upon) that canonical principle that says “whatever pertains to the whole pertains to every part of the whole.”
The whole of the Mass on Saturday evening pertains to Sunday; ergo, every part-of-the-whole likewise pertains to Sunday. That one sentence summarizes my entire position on the matter.
Part 2:
My starting point is not the definition of the word “day.”
Instead, I look to the purpose of canon 917. To ask the questions “what value is this canon defending?” and “what harmful act is the canon intended to protect against?”
My understanding is that the canon is intended to safeguard against an undue multiplication of Communion that is irreverent or misguided or even (in the extreme) superstitious.
Then I look at the actual situation at hand; for example, I see a faithful Catholic who attends Saturday morning votive Mass of the Immaculate Heart, then attends a funeral and receives Communion at both. I see that same person in a situation where he is participating in the Mass of Sunday, which just happens to be before midnight.
I ask myself: is such a person deserving of a penalty? should such a person be excluded from Holy Communion?
I recognize the obvious: if this person were to attend a late Mass at (let’s say) 1:00 AM on Sunday morning (a so called “printers Mass”) then there would be no hesitation whatsoever that he would be eligible to receive Communion.
I then look to the canons. I see where canon 917 simply talks about a day. Then I look to the definition of a day later in the code and I see that the word usually means “midnight to midnight” while it also explicitly permits the word to have some other meaning. So, what is that meaning? I look to the liturgical laws of the Church. I see that the liturgical law clearly says that a liturgical day of Sunday begins in the evening.
Then I ask myself, can I apply that definition of a day, taken in the liturgical sense to canon 917? In pondering that question, once again I ask myself: what is the purpose of canon 917? Is it meant to impose a penalty? Is it meant to be arbitrary? It it means to be a law for the sake of having a law? All of those questions I answer with “no.”
Instead, I answer that canon 917 is meant to be a safeguard against an irreverent multiplication of Communion. So again, I apply it to the situation. If this person before me, the one who attended 2 Saturday morning Masses acting (a) irreverently or (b) someone who desires full and active participation in his only opportunity to attend Sunday Mass. I realize that receiving Communion on Saturday is no obstacle to receiving it on Sunday, nor should it be. So then, what is the difference? The Church tells us that the Saturday evening Mass is the Mass of Sunday, and so I decide to treat that Mass just as I would any other Sunday Mass.
