Legality of saying Mass in non-Catholic buildings?

[JMJ_coder]

Besides the point that twenty minutes is nothing to be in the presence of God – people used to have to walk 20+ miles on foot and they did it gladly to go to Mass – I would ask them this question:

Why is it too far for you to travel to go to Mass, but not too far to make the priest travel to bring Mass to you?

 

[datingtrappists]

Wow, I would love to travel only 20 minutes to go to the Masses I go to on Sunday. I cant at an OF on Sunday mornings. That drive is about 40 minutes. Then I have to travel to make it to the EF in the afternoons. From the morning OF to the EF, it’s about a 30 minute drive. Technically the OF Mass is out of the way quite a bit, so at least my drive back home is only about 45 minutes.

Please note, I’m not complaining. I am just mentioning all of this so the reasons can be known why I have little to no compassion for those who think that a 10 or 20 minute drive is too long to reach Mass and is a sufficient reason to not follow the precepts of the church in regards to either fulfilling a holy day of obligation or holding Mass in an unsuitable place. The groups two options is offer up the longer drive for those who are sick and unable to make it to Mass (what I usually do… I sometimes try to pray the rosary while driving) or petition the Bishop to form their own parish, closer to them. To me, it seems like the first one is the easiest option, though I don’t know about the process of forming new parishes, and in the long run, the second may be the best one.

 

[FrDavid96]

Please understand dear readers that this is a typical way for a new parish to get started. After all, people need to first begin gathering for Mass at some place, and become a stable community, before they reach the point at which they can eventually become a mission and later a parish. This might happen because the current church is not close enough for them, or because the Catholic population is out-growing the current building, or any number of other reasons.

Based on the original poster’s descriptions, it seems like that’s what is happening–a community is in the very early stages of becomming a new parish. Since this is happening monthly, it is very likely that the bishop has given his permission. Of course, I can’t say that definitively, but only that it is very unlikely that the bishop has not given at least verbal permission for this to be happening.

One of my own parishes began in the late 1700s with a priest on horseback making occasional visits to a parishioner’s home to say Mass in the living room. It took them about 40 years before they were able to finally build a modest church. We look back on that situation now with awe and respect, rather than be critical of them for not meeting in a proper Catholic church (which they did not have anyway). Today, a priest arrives by car, and might have to say Mass in a school or park, or some other place. We hope that eventually this community will grow and finally reach the point where they can build a proper church.

 

[Talevita]

I lived on the other side of the mountain six or seven years ago. At the Catholic church there was a Mass every Tuesday evening followed by the Rosary; both took place outside on the other side of the church when the weather was nice. I loved the outdoor spiritual scene, there was hardly ever the sound of a car and there were no other buildings in view - only the beautiful sight of the mountains. I’m sure Mass would have taken place inside the church if there was more than eight regular attendees.

 

[Talevita]

Well when i attended a Catholic college in Montana there were Masses several times a week in all three dormitory buildings plus the campus church. And my church is being torn down later this year to build a new one; there are plenty of rumors as to where the Masses will be held during the rebuilding.

 

[Catitude]

I know they have asked our bishop if they could have their own parish because of the distance they have to travel. Which I don’t see how 20 minutes is too long a drive to get to Mass. Anyways he told them, as far as I know, that they were to only do a feesability (sp?) study to see if there is enough people for them to have their own parish. The maximum amount of people that show up on a regular basis is about 20 people. The ones who are involved are already complaining about the way things are going but our pastor and bishop aren’t doing really anything to either help them or to end their meetings, depending on what would be the best in this case. They can pretty much do whatever they want. If they had 50 families or more and they were regular attendees then I could understand wanting their own parish.

We also live in a rural community (there’s about 30,000 people in the whole county) and several missions that our two priests are responsible for. I’m just confused how it’s alright for them to have a Mass in a public school gym for 20 people who drive into town 20 minutes for their home to work and shop everyday but not come for Mass.

I do know that in some cases it is appropriate for a priest to say Mass outside like for campers because there’s no parish for miles for those campers. So does anyone know exactly how far is far enough to not have to drive to the nearest parish. What I mean is, is there any specific number as far as miles go?

 

[JReducation]

Well, if it’s any consolation for anyone, my community has scheduled our annual retreat for this year. Because there are too many of us, the only place than can house all of us is an Episcopal retreat center and we will be celebrating mass in their chapel.

The law is very clear and very straight forward. You use a Church; but if you don’t have another resource, you use what you have available. This is what it means when it says for a just reason.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[FrDavid96]

I know they have asked our bishop if they could have their own parish because of the distance they have to travel. Which I don’t see how 20 minutes is too long a drive to get to Mass. Anyways he told them, as far as I know, that they were to only do a feesability (sp?) study to see if there is enough people for them to have their own parish. The maximum amount of people that show up on a regular basis is about 20 people. The ones who are involved are already complaining about the way things are going but our pastor and bishop aren’t doing really anything to either help them or to end their meetings, depending on what would be the best in this case. They can pretty much do whatever they want. If they had 50 families or more and they were regular attendees then I could understand wanting their own parish.

We also live in a rural community (there’s about 30,000 people in the whole county) and several missions that our two priests are responsible for. I’m just confused how it’s alright for them to have a Mass in a public school gym for 20 people who drive into town 20 minutes for their home to work and shop everyday but not come for Mass.

I do know that in some cases it is appropriate for a priest to say Mass outside like for campers because there’s no parish for miles for those campers. So does anyone know exactly how far is far enough to not have to drive to the nearest parish. What I mean is, is there any specific number as far as miles go?

No, there is no specific number of miles, nor any specific number of people necessary for this to happen. That’s one of the reasons why it is up to the prudent judgment of the local bishop. What might be seen as a great distance in one part of the world or one part of the country, might not be perceived the same way in another part.

In Boston, 20 miles is a long way indeed to travel to find a Catholic church. In the desert of Arizona, 20 miles might be a short trip. It’s up to the local bishop. Likewise, the local bishop decides how many people justify a community of this sort.

The fact that the priest is still saying Mass means that he is supporting this (perhaps reluctantly, or with some reservations, but we can’t know that). If the priest did not see at least some possibility that they might eventually become their own parish, he wouldn’t continue with the Masses.

It’s clear from what you are saying that the bishop is aware of this situation. It’s also clear from the mere fact that it’s happening that he has given his approval–otherwise, he would put a stop to it.

I would say that this is not something to be concerned about in the sense of thinking that it’s improper or in any way a violation of canon or liturgical laws. Trust the bishop’s judgment.

 

[benedictgal]

Well, if it’s any consolation for anyone, my community has scheduled our annual retreat for this year. Because there are too many of us, the only place than can house all of us is an Episcopal retreat center and we will be celebrating mass in their chapel.

The law is very clear and very straight forward. You use a Church; but if you don’t have another resource, you use what you have available. This is what it means when it says for a just reason.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Although, we must bear in mind that Redemptionis Sacramentum makes this rather interesting notation regarding just where the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass should not be celebrated:

109.] It is never lawful for a Priest to celebrate in a temple or sacred place of any non-Christian religion.

Thus, a synagouge, a mosque nor a Budhist temple would be allowed. I am not sure if even a Mormom house of worship would be allowed.

 

[JReducation]

Although, we must bear in mind that Redemptionis Sacramentum makes this rather interesting notation regarding just where the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass should not be celebrated:

Thus, a synagouge, a mosque nor a Budhist temple would be allowed. I am not sure if even a Mormom house of worship would be allowed.

I’m not sure why you’re bringing this up. The point was whether it was OK to celebrate in a Pentecostal Church and I was responding by using the example of the Episcopalian retreat house.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[benedictgal]

I’m not sure why you’re bringing this up. The point was whether it was OK to celebrate in a Pentecostal Church and I was responding by using the example of the Episcopalian retreat house.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

I am simply clarifying the statement that you made:

but if you don’t have another resource, you use what you have available. This is what it means when it says for a just reason.

As I read what you wrote, it could lead people to believe that any place is suitable. That is just not the case, which is why I posted the reference to RS to clarify the matter.

 

[JReducation]

I am simply clarifying the statement that you made:

As I read what you wrote, it could lead people to believe that any place is suitable. That is just not the case, which is why I posted the reference to RS to clarify the matter.

That’s fine, but I can tell that you have never been a missionary in the middle of a war. You use what you can get to celebrate the mass and stay safe at the same time.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[benedictgal]

That’s fine, but I can tell that you have never been a missionary in the middle of a war. You use what you can get to celebrate the mass and stay safe at the same time.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

However, JR, that does not give us the right to disregard the norms. The section I quoted in RS notes the word “never”.

 

[JReducation]

However, JR, that does not give us the right to disregard the norms. The section I quoted in RS notes the word “never”.

No one is promoting disregarding the norms in ordinary situations. When you’re in war torn city and you’re hiding in a mosque, that’s the only place where you can celebrate mass or be killed. The point is that the norms do not impose a penalty of sin for situations that are out of our control. They are written for situations where we have some controls.

In the USA we’re not in a war zone. There is no need to go to a mosque to hide and celebrate the Eucharist in hiding. Therefore, the norm stands and must be observed.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[benedictgal]

No one is promoting disregarding the norms in ordinary situations. When you’re in war torn city and you’re hiding in a mosque, that’s the only place where you can celebrate mass or be killed. The point is that the norms do not impose a penalty of sin for situations that are out of our control. They are written for situations where we have some controls.

In the USA we’re not in a war zone. There is no need to go to a mosque to hide and celebrate the Eucharist in hiding. Therefore, the norm stands and must be observed.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

But, when you made your initial post, you spoke in generalities, even though RS is quite clear that it is never lawful for a priest to celebate Mass in a temple or in a non-Christian house of worship.

JR, with all due respect, you seem to seek out loopholes. You may not mean to, but, that is how you seem to come across, as I have read your posts. In Mexico, during the persecutions, people literally went underground to celebrate Mass, but, I don’t think that there are records of priests celebrating Mass in the Aztec ruins.

When the Holy See means “never”, it means just that, “never”. It does not mean maybe. It means that is should not be done.

 

[JReducation]

But, when you made your initial post, you spoke in generalities, even though RS is quite clear that it is never lawful for a priest to celebate Mass in a temple or in a non-Christian house of worship.

JR, with all due respect, you seem to seek out loopholes. You may not mean to, but, that is how you seem to come across, as I have read your posts. In Mexico, during the persecutions, people literally went underground to celebrate Mass, but, I don’t think that there are records of priests celebrating Mass in the Aztec ruins.

When the Holy See means “never”, it means just that, “never”. It does not mean maybe. It means that is should not be done.

Thanks for your feedback. But I’m not trying to find loopholes. However, I will not condemn those who have found themselves in situations that we cannot imagine. The example that I gave was provided by a priest who was in Sudan during the war. I have been in wortorn countries, fortunately I have never been under fire, but I can’t imagine what that would be like not knowing if you’re going to die and wanting to receive the Eucharist under such hardship.

I beleive that the Church is merciful as Christ is merciful in such cases.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF