Is Mass ever prohibited from being said?

[FrDavid96]

Even today certain times are forbidden for Mass.

“Anticipated” masses–the Church uses the Jewish practice of starting the day in the evening, so “vigil” masses come in what is, to us, the prior evening, but they cannot be too early–I believe in most dioceses in America the rule is they cannot start before 4:00 p.m. on most days.

Mass is forbidden on Good Friday and Holy Saturday; even the Easter Vigil cannot be started before dark, so it is more like 7:00 or 8:00 (or later) rather than 4:00.

Mass on Holy Thursday without a congregation is forbidden. The permitted morning Mass is the Chrism Mass, done by the Bishop with the assembled clergy. In cases of true necessity, an ordinary may permit another mass besides the Evening Mass of the Lord’s Supper to be celebrated, even in the morning, but only for those not able to attend the Evening Mass. All this points to the importance of the Holy Thursday Mass, and its uniqueness.

Other than those, there is no specific time limit on Masses. Historically, with fasting that began at Midnight, masses later in the day would be a problem–do you fast for 18 hours just to celebrate Mass at 6:00 p.m.? But the modern discipline of much shorter fasts resolved that practical issue.

Actually, Masses can be celebrated on Saturday in the afternoon. There is nothing preventing this. However, for the Mass to fulfill ones Sunday obligation, it must be an evening Mass, which most canonists understand as 4 PM. One may go to a Mass at 2 PM on Saturday, it just won’t fulfill the Sunday obligation.

In order to avoid confusion, some bishops have made it particular law for their diocese to disallow Saturday afternoon Masses; but this is a matter of local discipline. Such Masses would not be violating the universal Code.

 

[Vico]

Actually, Masses can be celebrated on Saturday in the afternoon. There is nothing preventing this. However, for the Mass to fulfill ones Sunday obligation, it must be an evening Mass, which most canonists understand as 4 PM. One may go to a Mass at 2 PM on Saturday, it just won’t fulfill the Sunday obligation.

In order to avoid confusion, some bishops have made it particular law for their diocese to disallow Saturday afternoon Masses; but this is a matter of local discipline. Such Masses would not be violating the universal Code.

Notably there are two parishes in the USA, that I know of, that have Saturday vigil Mass @ 2:30 PM that fulfills the Sunday obligation:

Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception
416 W. 12th Street
Kansas City, MO 64105

*Guardian Angel Cathedral *
302 Cathedral Way
Las Vegas, NV 89109

 

[EasterJoy]

Notably there are two parishes in the USA, that I know of, that have Saturday vigil Mass @ 2:30 PM that fulfills the Sunday obligation:

Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception
416 W. 12th Street
Kansas City, MO 64105

*Guardian Angel Cathedral *
302 Cathedral Way
Las Vegas, NV 89109

Yes, but if memory servers correctly, the earliest Las Vegas Mass was added to others because of a severe shortages in viable alternatives, once the necessary number of Masses that need to be offered every weekend (because of the demand) and the available resources, such as space in the churches and the number of priests available to say Mass on weekends are all taken into consideration. (I have not heard anything about the situation in Kansas City.)

This is different than if the cathedral in Portland, Oregon, were to offer the same thing when there are plenty of places to attend a Saturday night or Sunday Mass in the Portland Metro area.

 

[Vico]

I would submit that we have no universally proper vocabulary for our now-regular Saturday-evening-Masses-with-Sunday-formularies, since both vigil and anticipated fail in certain respects. On the one hand, a vigil Mass is supposed to have different Mass propers from the Mass of the liturgical day itself - the Missal provides 8 of these vigils (though all but the Easter Vigil are for optional use). So viewed from this aspect our Sunday-Mass-on-Saturday is certainly not a vigil. But neither is it (normally) anticipated, if we consider that the liturgical Sunday usually begins with its first Vespers Saturday evening. That being said, there are occasional instances in which these Saturday non-vigil Masses are indeed anticipatory, such as in November 2014 when All Souls fell on a Sunday. The instructions from our diocesan worship office were that Masses on the evening of Saturday, Nov 1, were to use the texts of All Souls, since the role of that regularly occurring Mass time was that of, in their terms, anticipated Mass. The liturgical day was All Saints, but we said Mass of All Souls.

There is a specific vocabulary used in the laws, “vel ipso die festo vel vespere diei praecedentis” (either on the feast day itself or in the evening of the preceding day). The two days are the feast day itself and preceding day.Can. 1248 - § 1. Praecepto de Missa participanda satisfacit qui Missae assistit ubicumque celebratur ritu catholico vel ipso die festo vel vespere diei praecedentis.

Can. 1248 §1. A person who assists at a Mass celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite either on the feast day itself or in the evening of the preceding day satisfies the obligation of participating in the Mass.

 

[Vico]

Yes, but if memory servers correctly, the earliest Las Vegas Mass was added to others because of a severe shortages in viable alternatives, once the necessary number of Masses that need to be offered every weekend (because of the demand) and the available resources, such as space in the churches and the number of priests available to say Mass on weekends are all taken into consideration. (I have not heard anything about the situation in Kansas City.)

This is different than if the cathedral in Portland, Oregon, were to offer the same thing when there are plenty of places to attend a Saturday night or Sunday Mass in the Portland Metro area.

There are certainly different situations in various locations.

The Kansas City parish site states that “[Both Masses fulfill the Sunday Obligation]” and lists 2:30 pm and 4:30 pm. The Las Vegas parish site states also has a non-vigil Mass listed at 12:10 pm and three vigil Masses at 2:30 pm, 4 pm, and 5:30 pm.

They are all in keeping with the ideas expressed by the Holy See:

*Christus Dominus (1965)
**"*The common good sometimes demands the saying of Mass after midday: For example, for the workers in some industries who work their shifts even on feast days, for those categories of workers who must be on the job during the morning hours of feast days, like dock workers, and likewise for those who have come in great numbers and from considerable distances for some religious or social celebration, etc."
*and Eucharisticum Mysterium (1967)

• “The purpose of this concession is in fact to enable the Christians of today to celebrate more easily the day of the resurrection of the Lord.”

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

Back to the original question–Masses may not normally be said between the Mass of the Lord’s Supper on Holy Thursday until the Easter Vigil, excepting for dispensations that might be given by the Holy See or perhaps a local bishop, due to grave situations.

a) what kind of grave situation would that be?

In 2009 there was a deadly earthquake in L’Aquila shortly before Easter. Pope Benedict allowed a funeral Mass for the victims to be celebrated on Good Friday.

If we are told not to call it “praefestivae” in Latin then neither should we call it “anticipated” in English.

I’m not disputing the general point; just highlighting that at least in this diocese (and our worship director told us this was in line with USCCB instructions, so I imagine this to be normal), there will be solemnity Saturdays from time to time on which we celebrate the Mass of a different liturgical day, in which case it truly is anticipated.

There is a specific vocabulary used in the laws, “vel ipso die festo vel vespere diei praecedentis” (either on the feast day itself or in the evening of the preceding day).

Those terms are for the time when Mass is celebrated, not for the Mass itself. I might fulfill the obligation at a nuptial Mass or requiem Mass. What do we call a *Sunday *Mass celebrated “vespere diei precedentis”? Unresolved. Common usage says “vigil,” but that is imprecise, as noted above.

 

[FrDavid96]

…
I’m not disputing the general point; just highlighting that at least in this diocese (and our worship director told us this was in line with USCCB instructions, so I imagine this to be normal), there will be solemnity Saturdays from time to time on which we celebrate the Mass of a different liturgical day, in which case it truly is anticipated.

I can see maybe, just maybe, calling it “anticipated” on certain days like the evening of November 1 when it’s an All Souls Mass.

Those terms are for the time when Mass is celebrated, not for the Mass itself. I might fulfill the obligation at a nuptial Mass or requiem Mass. What do we call a *Sunday *Mass celebrated “vespere diei precedentis”? Unresolved. Common usage says “vigil,” but that is imprecise, as noted above.

I don’t know what to call it either.
I’ve stopped calling it anything at my own parish. I simply call it “Mass” without any adjectives.

I do think we can use the word “vigil” if it’s truly a Mass in the night, even if it doesn’t have a specific Mass formulary for that time. Vigil does, after all, mean “in the night” or “to stay awake.” So if there’s a Mass at 10 PM on the eve of the 14th Sunday of Ordinary Time, I don’t see anything wrong (indeed completely proper) to call it a vigil Mass, but simply as a description of the time. After all, if a parish has a 10 AM Mass and a 2 PM Mass, one might call those the morning Mass and the afternoon Mass. It doesn’t mean they have different Collects, it’s simply a way of differentiating them verbally.

 

[FrDavid96]

There are certainly different situations in various locations.

[mentions specific places]

They are all in keeping with the ideas expressed by the Holy See:

A Mass that starts earlier than the time described in the canon doesn’t fulfill the requirements of the canon.

Christus Dominus (1965)
“The common good sometimes demands the saying of Mass after midday: For example, for the workers in some industries who work their shifts even on feast days, for those categories of workers who must be on the job during the morning hours of feast days, like dock workers, and likewise for those who have come in great numbers and from considerable distances for some religious or social celebration, etc.”

That’s a good point to bring up, but it contradicts the idea of a Mass in the afternoon fulfilling the Sunday obligation.

If one reads the text carefully,
“This holds true despite the command of canon 821, # 1. The common good sometimes demands the saying of Mass after midday.”
That makes sense because the canon itself said that there could not be Masses after midday (+ 1 hour).
You left out the rest of the text thought: “Such Masses, however, may not be said before four o’clock in the afternoon”

The text of Christus Dominus makes a distinction between “Masses after midday” on the one hand and “evening Masses” on the other hand.

*and Eucharisticum Mysterium (1967)
*“The purpose of this concession is in fact to enable the Christians of today to celebrate more easily the day of the resurrection of the Lord.”

I wonder why you keep quoting that. As far as I know everyone takes this as a given.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

I’ve stopped calling it anything at my own parish. I simply call it “Mass” without any adjectives.

I think that’s probably best practice. In my parish, since we don’t have any overlapping AM/PM Mass times, I just refer to Masses by their start time.

 

[bmonk]

. . .

c. Now that’s getting into two entirely different questions. Yes, a Mass is normally not to be done for a ceremony of a mixed-marriage. Still, it’s not absolutely forbidden.

. . . .

When counseling mixed-faith couples about the marriage ceremony, I suggest that a sign of unity is not very effective if both members of the couple being united cannot partake of it–not to mention the guests, presumably including most of the non-Catholic partner’s family!

 

[bmonk]

Actually, Masses can be celebrated on Saturday in the afternoon. There is nothing preventing this. However, for the Mass to fulfill ones Sunday obligation, it must be an evening Mass, which most canonists understand as 4 PM. One may go to a Mass at 2 PM on Saturday, it just won’t fulfill the Sunday obligation.

In order to avoid confusion, some bishops have made it particular law for their diocese to disallow Saturday afternoon Masses; but this is a matter of local discipline. Such Masses would not be violating the universal Code.

That was what I intended to say, and certainly (I hope) implied: not that the Mass would be disallowed in such an afternoon (we often celebrate wedding Masses then, and sometimes even funeral Masses), but rather that it would not be a “vigil” Mass that fulfills the obligation for the “following” feastday.

 

[bmonk]

I’m not disputing the general point; just highlighting that at least in this diocese (and our worship director told us this was in line with USCCB instructions, so I imagine this to be normal), there will be solemnity Saturdays from time to time on which we celebrate the Mass of a different liturgical day, in which case it truly is anticipated.

In our diocese, in these cases, a Mass celebrated on Saturday Evening is a Mass of the Solemnity in question, and does not fulfill the Sunday obligation.

 

[bmonk]

A Mass that starts earlier than the time described in the canon doesn’t fulfill the requirements of the canon.

. . .

If one reads the text carefully,
“This holds true despite the command of canon 821, # 1. The common good sometimes demands the saying of Mass after midday.”
That makes sense because the canon itself said that there could not be Masses after midday (+ 1 hour).
You left out the rest of the text thought: “Such Masses, however, may not be said before four o’clock in the afternoon”

The text of Christus Dominus makes a distinction between “Masses after midday” on the one hand and “evening Masses” on the other hand.

. . .

On the other hand, in Canon Law class the point was made that Canon Law is in the Roman Law tradition–that the law sets out the general principle as an ideal, and it is then up to the competent authority (typically the local ordinary) to make exceptions through dispensations when the principle is not appropriate to fulfill exactly in the local situation. So, yes–these Masses are not to be said before four o’clock in the afternoon. But (for example as in the Las Vegas case) sometimes an exemption would be appropriate, if the strict application of the law would cause a significant number of people to have to miss Mass. But–as it is an explicit restriction of the universal Law of the Church, it would require an explicit dispensation to be relaxed.

 

[bmonk]

Historically, the theory is, that the celebration of the Eucharist was preceded by the recital of the psalms and readings of the Old Testament and New Testament called the Mass of the Catechumens. Probably this part of the Mass was the first form of the Divine Office, at the time when the vigils and the Eucharistic Synaxis were one. So that celebration was in the morning.

The Holy Saturday Vigil used to be all night long following this pattern, and then got moved to Saturday morning (I think by seventh century). Then in 1955 Pope Pius XII restored it to after nightfall on Holy Saturday.

This would have been pretty early, but not probably in the first century. Acts makes a distinction between the “prayers” (the prayers that came to be the Divine Office, especially at dawn and dusk, plus the day hours from the Temple prayers, as in Acts 3) and the “breaking of the bread,” which was the early name for the Eucharist.

I suspect that, once persecutions became a real possibility, as well as due to the lack of a “free day” on Sunday to celebrate, Christians would have had to gather when they were free to worship–at night. This is when the “night prayers” of vigils would have been joined to the Eucharist. Also, since baptisms were performed at the Easter Vigil (and a “make-up” at Pentecost for those unable to be baptized on Easter) and needed more time, those feasts still have the option of extra readings for a longer vigil.

 

[bmonk]

I would submit that we have no universally proper vocabulary for our now-regular Saturday-evening-Masses-with-Sunday-formularies, since both vigil and anticipated fail in certain respects. On the one hand, a vigil Mass is supposed to have different Mass propers from the Mass of the liturgical day itself - the Missal provides 8 of these vigils (though all but the Easter Vigil are for optional use). So viewed from this aspect our Sunday-Mass-on-Saturday is certainly not a vigil. But neither is it (normally) anticipated, if we consider that the liturgical Sunday usually begins with its first Vespers Saturday evening. That being said, there are occasional instances in which these Saturday non-vigil Masses are indeed anticipatory, such as in November 2014 when All Souls fell on a Sunday. The instructions from our diocesan worship office were that Masses on the evening of Saturday, Nov 1, were to use the texts of All Souls, since the role of that regularly occurring Mass time was that of, in their terms, anticipated Mass. The liturgical day was All Saints, but we said Mass of All Souls.

1. Yes, some major feasts have different readings for Vigil Masses–but it is not necessarily required. Other feasts of comparable rank do not have separate vigils.
2. The case with All Souls is odd–it has no explicit rank, but it does take precedence over Sunday. Yet Vespers on the evening of November 1 is usually that of All Saints. So, in this case, the diocesan authority was used to clarify those masses.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

Not sure about Catholic practice, but an Eastern Orthodox priest will not celebrate Divine Liturgy if no parishioners show up.

Neither will Eastern Catholic priests in Byzantine Rite churches. The Divine Liturgy is communal and cannot be celebrated alone. In fact, this is usually a running punch line between priest and cantor, especially for weekday services. As long as both show up, the Divine Liturgy can be celebrated.

 

[Vico]

This would have been pretty early, but not probably in the first century. Acts makes a distinction between the “prayers” (the prayers that came to be the Divine Office, especially at dawn and dusk, plus the day hours from the Temple prayers, as in Acts 3) and the “breaking of the bread,” which was the early name for the Eucharist.

I suspect that, once persecutions became a real possibility, as well as due to the lack of a “free day” on Sunday to celebrate, Christians would have had to gather when they were free to worship–at night. This is when the “night prayers” of vigils would have been joined to the Eucharist. Also, since baptisms were performed at the Easter Vigil (and a “make-up” at Pentecost for those unable to be baptized on Easter) and needed more time, those feasts still have the option of extra readings for a longer vigil.

The very earliest Eucharistic synaxis was at the meal at end of the day. By the time of Justin Martyr (died 165 A.D.) it had been moved to the morning.

 

[Phemie]

In our diocese, in these cases, a Mass celebrated on Saturday Evening is a Mass of the Solemnity in question, and does not fulfill the Sunday obligation.

I don’t understand – unless you mean that in this case the Saturday is a Holy Day of Obligation.

Any Mass celebrated in the evening of Saturday fulfills your Sunday obligation - unless Saturday was a HDO and you used that evening Mass to fulfill that obligation. There are no two-for-ones when it comes to your obligation to attend Mass both on Sundays and HDOs.

 

[Phemie]

Not sure about Catholic practice, but an Eastern Orthodox priest will not celebrate Divine Liturgy if no parishioners show up.

Such is not the case in the Catholic Church. I know many retired priests who get up early in the morning, go to the chapel of their retirement home and say a private Mass alone before they start their day.