MERGED: Immaculate Conception Holy Day in the USA and Obligation

[maddogdm]

**As far as most are concerned **it is not an open case with CL,

Thanks, at least you agree that it is not a closed case for all, ie its open

You are being obstinate.

If you think I am being obstinate, perhaps consider whether you are too! Perhaps in calling me obstinate though, you may be breaking the rules you agreed to in joining the forum.

I private messaged you because this would end in an argument that cannot be solved on the open forum. You are proving my thoughts to be correct.

We agree, only a determination by the competent bishops will solve this, till then it is an open question

Please produce one statement, official statement, from any US bishop stating what you claim is true.

I don’t know of a bishop who has ruled EITHER WAY publicly on this, because it is an open question. Lots of parish priests do, and some (though few) diocesan offices FOR THAT DIOCESE, but no bishops I know of have made a ruling that they say applies outside their diocese. Most bishops chose to leave it as an open question for their diocese,
Lot’s of parishes GET IT WRONG, like this one pointed out to me in a private post. stmmsi.org/ChurchHolyDaysOfObligation.html
I object to people exaggerating or minimising the obligation to observe holydays of obligation, and like Dr Peters and other canon lawyers, will defend the conscience of someone who with good grounds holds to the opinion that attending on Saturday evening Mass satsfies the obligation for both feasts.

Furthermore, you cannot refute my private message just by saying it is wrong, my answer is, no you’re wrong, wait no you’re wrong, no you’re wrong. See, that doesn’t work very well.

That’s why I would like you (or someone competent to advise you) to address my argument from the mind of the legislator (can. 17). Until then, I agree it doesn’t work for you to just carry on as you described.
The church has decided that one obligatory mass on Sunday, Dec 8 is enough for the observance in 2013, BECAUSE the Feast is transferred to a consecutive day. This indicates that the mind of the legislator is that ONE obligatory mass is enough to observe the TWO holydays on consecutive days in some cases. You have not touched on this argument from canon law based on the mind of the legislator (Can. 17 Ecclesiastical laws must be understood in accord with the proper meaning of the words considered in their text and context. If the meaning remains doubtful and obscure, recourse must be made to parallel places, if there are such, to the purpose and circumstances of the law, and to the mind of the legislator.)

2013 IC = transferred to Monday the 9th of December so there is no obligation for Mass on the 9th or the 8th for the IC solemnity. The Sunday feast day trumps because of liturgical rank the IC feast day. The Christmas on Sunday issue is just as simple.

The obligation to observe the Immaculate Conception on Dec 8 remains in 2012, and is fullfilled by going to mass that day. The mind of the Church seems to be that one mass is enough obligation to observe both feasts in some situations! Some would argue that if you deliberately neglect Mass aware of the importance of Dec 8 then this is more serious than on another ordinary Sunday!

After this post I will not debate you directly, although I will refute improper posts by you or any one else.

I am not sure it is a debate or refutation when all you can do is say “We think you’re wrong”.

But at any rate, at least now we can all get some respite!

 

[Vico]

No, just one Parish. In my year back in the church, all of the Holy Day Masses have been in the evening of the actual Holy Day, with no Vigil masses. If this Holy Day was on any other day of the week, I suspect that Mass would be in the evening as well. Since it’s falling on Saturday, morning is the only time it works, which i’m fine with.

In Des Moines, there are a couple on Saturday Dec 8, 2012 4:30 PM:

St. Anthony
St. Theresa of the Child Jesus

 

[MarkThompson]

For whatever it’s worth, although I’ve had better (or at least, other) things to do that go around in circles on this topic, I for one continue to hold the same position as maddogdm, namely, that a single Saturday-night Mass (in this case) would satisfy the obligation for both the Immaculate Conception and Sunday. I just don’t want people to bully maddog with the claim that everybody else in the world agrees he’s wrong and so he needs to can it.

I was glad to see that Prof. Peters concurs with my view – which, incidentally, some others like Brother JR denied – that a Saturday-night Mass celebrated as the anticipated Mass for Sunday would satisfy the Immaculate Conception requirement (setting the twofer question aside). What was nice was that Prof. Peters actually provided a canonically-based argument to show why this should be the case.

Regrettably, on the issue where he and I disagree – the twofer question – he just made a conclusory, hand-waving statement, with the snappy line that two obligations must obviously require two Masses. I do not blame him for resorting to ipse dixitism on his own blog, but it is disappointing to see people crowing that now the entire matter has somehow been definitively settled because of this. Anyway, the snappy motto is hardly axiomatic, since, as we all know, there are lots of situations in which one things does satisfy two requirements. “Go to Mass to satisfy the requirements for an indulgence” + “Go to Mass because it is Sunday” = a single Mass suffices.

The conceptual error that is going on here is in thinking that the reason going to Mass is required on a HDO is because the Church has decided that it is necessary on those days to add 1 to your Mass-count. The real reason is because it is necessary to sanctify those days by participating in the Holy Mass. No one has yet explained why this cannot be done with a single Mass which falls on the overlapping period. Many people do not seem to like the idea, because they are personally in favor or more not fewer obligations, but that is not a logical or canonical reason for anything.

Incidentally, even if I were wrong, the fact remains that the law is ambiguous and the question is unsettled. In such a situation of uncertainty, one is not bounden to the more onerous version of the requirement.

 

[Ed_Peters]

MarkT, that was a little ipse-dixit-y of me to simply assert it, and my guilty conscience got to me, so I posted evidence for my position in my second blog post. Perhaps you did not see it. I did point out, wryly I thought, that your position would require us to hold that some Masses are “Super Masses” based on what hour they are celebrated, but, well, we’re going in circles here.

That said, there’s no “doubt of law” in regard to whether two Masses are required for two obligations under the current law. I’ve found no published canonical opinions supporting that view. Contrary views among others does not amount to “doubt of law” among canonists. K?

Best, edp.

 

[lllj]

I understand that Saturday is a Holy Day of Obligation.

My church always holds mass on Saturday evenings (as a Sunday mass).

From what I understand, there is no Immaculate Conception mass this Saturday at my church (is that normal?). If I go Saturday night, is that for the Immaculate Conception or for Sunday?

 

[Vico]

For whatever it’s worth, although I’ve had better (or at least, other) things to do that go around in circles on this topic, I for one continue to hold the same position as maddogdm, namely, that a single Saturday-night Mass (in this case) would satisfy the obligation for both the Immaculate Conception and Sunday. I just don’t want people to bully maddog with the claim that everybody else in the world agrees he’s wrong and so he needs to can it.

I was glad to see that Prof. Peters concurs with my view – which, incidentally, some others like Brother JR denied – that a Saturday-night Mass celebrated as the anticipated Mass for Sunday would satisfy the Immaculate Conception requirement (setting the twofer question aside). What was nice was that Prof. Peters actually provided a canonically-based argument to show why this should be the case.

Regrettably, on the issue where he and I disagree – the twofer question – he just made a conclusory, hand-waving statement, with the snappy line that two obligations must obviously require two Masses. I do not blame him for resorting to ipse dixitism on his own blog, but it is disappointing to see people crowing that now the entire matter has somehow been definitively settled because of this. Anyway, the snappy motto is hardly axiomatic, since, as we all know, there are lots of situations in which one things does satisfy two requirements. “Go to Mass to satisfy the requirements for an indulgence” + “Go to Mass because it is Sunday” = a single Mass suffices.

The conceptual error that is going on here is in thinking that the reason going to Mass is required on a HDO is because the Church has decided that it is necessary on those days to add 1 to your Mass-count. The real reason is because it is necessary to sanctify those days by participating in the Holy Mass. No one has yet explained why this cannot be done with a single Mass which falls on the overlapping period. Many people do not seem to like the idea, because they are personally in favor or more not fewer obligations, but that is not a logical or canonical reason for anything.

Incidentally, even if I were wrong, the fact remains that the law is ambiguous and the question is unsettled. In such a situation of uncertainty, one is not bounden to the more onerous version of the requirement.

Edward Peters, J.D.L, J.C.D., cited “GB & I Comm.at 702” * for “two obligations means two satisfactions”.

• The Canon Law: Letter & Spirit (1995), Canon Law Society of Great Britain and Ireland

 

[Immacolata]

If I recall correctly, I think I remember reading that after 4pm, the mass on Saturday is generally for the Sunday obligation. Is there any other church you could go to to fill your Holy Day Mass obligation?

 

[system]

Hi - I found this link referenced by Jimmy Akin.

canonlawblog.wordpress.com/2012/12/02/two-mass-obligations-means-two-masses-but/

Seems like the bottom line is that attendance is required at two Masses this weekend to satisfy both the Immaculate Conception and Second Sunday of Advent.

 

[acadiANNA]

Our Church will be having a 5:00 PM Vigil Mass for the Immaculate Conception on Friday and a 9:00 AM Mass on Saturday. The Sunday obligation Masses will be as regularly scheduled.

 

[ilySHJ]

No Vigil?!?! That’s odd. Is Friday your priest’s day off?

We always have a 7:30 PM Vigil Mass for Holy Days. It’s much better than some parishes that offer 5 or 5:30. No way for me to get home that early without taking a half-day off.

God Bless

Hi, we have only a vigil Mass for the Immaculate Conception. For Sunday we have only one Mass. We have no weekday Masses at all. Other parishes around here do the same - not that any of them are less than a good hour distant.

Certain bishops require their priests to make the sacraments more available. Others don’t. One bishop I knew required his priests to celebrate Mass daily, to have scheduled confessions, and some sort of priest led adult catechesis or discussion. AND all of these things had to be in the bulletin. He was also the most hands-on bishop! If you walked in the chancery he was often the one to greet you and see what you needed. Now I’m in a diocese where the bishop ministers from inside a glass bubble or the topside of the glass ceiling.

 

[Joannm]

You can attend any mass on Dec. 8 (or the evening of Dec. 11) and have it satisfy you obligation for the Holy Day. You don’t have to attend a mass where the readings are for the feast, although that would be ideal.

 

[StJudePray4Me]

Hi - I found this link referenced by Jimmy Akin.

canonlawblog.wordpress.com/2012/12/02/two-mass-obligations-means-two-masses-but/

Seems like the bottom line is that attendance is required at two Masses this weekend to satisfy both the Immaculate Conception and Second Sunday of Advent.

I believe this varies by Diocese. I understand that in my Diocese, there is no obligation for the Immaculate Conception, but if one wishes to attend a Mass for that Feast, it should NOT be the Sunday Vigil Mass (the 5 pm Saturday Mass).

 

[Chatter163]

We have had eight different threads on this over the past week. They have all been merged into one long thread–check it out.

It is always good to check to see if there is already a thread on a subject before creating a new one.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

Regrettably, on the issue where he and I disagree – the twofer question – he just made a conclusory, hand-waving statement, with the snappy line that two obligations must obviously require two Masses. I do not blame him for resorting to ipse dixitism on his own blog, but it is disappointing to see people crowing that now the entire matter has somehow been definitively settled because of this.

In his second post on the matter, he did more than that - he offered a citation in support of this view. I did not look it up myself, I admit, but nor have I seen anyone engage him on the matter. Perhaps you and maddogdm just missed that part; I do admit it wasn’t a very long part of his second entry.

MarkT, that was a little ipse-dixit-y of me to simply assert it, and my guilty conscience got to me, so I posted evidence for my position in my second blog post. Perhaps you did not see it. I did point out, wryly I thought, that your position would require us to hold that some Masses are “Super Masses” based on what hour they are celebrated, but, well, we’re going in circles here.

That said, there’s no “doubt of law” in regard to whether two Masses are required for two obligations under the current law. I’ve found no published canonical opinions supporting that view. Contrary views among others does not amount to “doubt of law” among canonists. K?

Best, edp.

Hey, cool, you’re on CAF! Welcome.

I understand that Saturday is a Holy Day of Obligation.

My church always holds mass on Saturday evenings (as a Sunday mass).

From what I understand, there is no Immaculate Conception mass this Saturday at my church (is that normal?).

No, it’s not. If you’re correct about that, I have no idea why there isn’t one…

If I go Saturday night, is that for the Immaculate Conception or for Sunday?

It’s almost certainly for Sunday, but that doesn’t matter: our obligation does not require us to assist at a Mass of whatever feast the holy day is. So you can go to the evening Mass and it will count for your IC obligation. It can’t fulfill both obligations at once, though, so you should go again on Sunday.

Sorry that your parish doesn’t have an actual Mass for the Immaculate Conception. That’s a shame. I have no idea of the reason for that, so I can’t comment further.

I believe this varies by Diocese. I understand that in my Diocese, there is no obligation for the Immaculate Conception, but if one wishes to attend a Mass for that Feast, it should NOT be the Sunday Vigil Mass (the 5 pm Saturday Mass).

Can a single bishop dispense the faithful of his diocese from this obligation? I hope Vico weighs in here.

I was under the impression that this decision belongs to the U.S. bishops as a whole. But I could easily be wrong, and probably am.

 

[Lapey]

usccb.org/about/divine-worship/liturgical-calendar/upload/2013cal.pdf

Go to this link and find page 41. You will see that December 8th of 2013 is the Second Sunday of advent and a day of obligation for that Sunday. The Solemnity of the IC is moved to Monday the 9th and is not a Holy Day of obligation. The obligation is abrogated; it is not automatically taken care of by making Mass on Sunday the 8th.

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=5932

This page is “General Norms for the Liturgical Year and the Calendar” by the Sacred Congregation of Divine Worship. If you read it in its entirety you will see that Sundays during Advent are not outranked by any Solemnity.

I don’t know of a bishop who has ruled EITHER WAY publicly on this, because it is an open question. Lots of parish priests do, and some (though few) diocesan offices FOR THAT DIOCESE, but no bishops I know of have made a ruling that they say applies outside their diocese. Most bishops chose to leave it as an open question for their diocese,

diocesepvd.org/12-8-feast-of-the-immaculate-conception/

From the Diocese web site from Providence Rhode Island.

This one is from the administration of the diocesan website, which means it is approved by the bishop and is in line with his direction so it does speak for this bishop. There are more to back up what this bishop has said, but none that I can find that go against his directive.

Lot’s of parishes GET IT WRONG, like this one pointed out to me in a private post. stmmsi.org/ChurchHolyDaysOfObligation.html
I object to people exaggerating or minimising the obligation to observe holydays of obligation, and like Dr Peters and other canon lawyers, will defend the conscience of someone who with good grounds holds to the opinion that attending on Saturday evening Mass satsfies the obligation for both feasts.

This link you have provided appears to be a youth ministry news letter or web site and is in direct opposition to the USCCB web site’s calendar for 2013. I have copied and pasted the USCCB directive;

“8 SUN SECOND SUNDAY OF ADVENT violet
Is 11:1-10/Rom 15:4-9/Mt 3:1-12 (4) Pss II
9 Mon The Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary, white
Patronal Feastday of the United States of America
Solemnity [not a Holyday of Obligation]
Gn 3:9-15, 20/Eph 1:3-6, 11-12/Lk 1:26-38 (689) Pss Prop”

I think I will go with our conference of bishops on that one. Oh, yes I agree many church parishes “get it wrong”. You provided a perfect example of this.

The church has decided that one obligatory mass on Sunday, Dec 8 is enough for the observance in 2013, BECAUSE the Feast is transferred to a consecutive day. This indicates that the mind of the legislator is that ONE obligatory mass is enough to observe the TWO holydays on consecutive days in some cases. You have not touched on this argument from canon law based on the mind of the legislator (Can. 17 Ecclesiastical laws must be understood in accord with the proper meaning of the words considered in their text and context. If the meaning remains doubtful and obscure, recourse must be made to parallel places, if there are such, to the purpose and circumstances of the law, and to the mind of the legislator.)

You will not find any official documents to back up your assertion here. You have been provided many that oppose your opinion which is based in “reading between the lines” of an action of transferring the solemnity to Monday. Please refer back to the USCCB web site to see that there is no obligation for the Solemnity of IC in 2013. Sunday December 8th 2013 is the Second Sunday of Advent; that’s it.

The obligation to observe the Immaculate Conception on Dec 8 remains in 2012, and is fullfilled by going to mass that day. The mind of the Church seems to be that one mass is enough obligation to observe both feasts in some situations! Some would argue that if you deliberately neglect Mass aware of the importance of Dec 8 then this is more serious than on another ordinary Sunday!

Finally we have some agreement!!! Yes, the Solemnity of IC is satisfied by going to any Mass on December 8th, 2012, or on Friday evening of Dec. 7th. However, if the evening Mass made on the 8th is your obligation for IC, it does not fulfill the Sunday obligation. The mind of the Church has been documented and you have been provided the documents to illustrate this.

Now if you care to continue this discussion, please provide some proof that any bishops or canon lawyers or official Church documents back up your case.

“I just don’t want people to bully maddog with the claim that everybody else in the world agrees he’s wrong and so he needs to can it.” MT.

No one is bullying anyone. Sometimes we are wrong and receive correction. It is up to us to accept that correction or reject it. I was corrected in this thread as well, I was under the impression that the Sunday Vigil Mass would not suffice for the IC obligation, I was wrong. The need to research this because of this thread has helped me understand much more about rankings of feast days then simply one holy day. I appreciate the opposition which in turn causes me to search for answers. If you don’t like or reject the answers we have presented here, then please make the case for your opinion. But to simply make an assertion and call some bullies is not going to cut it.

 

[Joe_5859]

I think I’ll go friday,saturday and sunday…how blessed are we!!

Can’t go wrong there! Indeed, we are very blessed.

 

[lllj]

Never mind - I called the church and they are holding a mass Saturday morning. They forgot to post it in the bulletin.

 

[Joe_5859]

Fr. Z weighs in.

Interestingly enough, his opinion is that going to one Mass on Saturday evening would fulfill both obligations. But he defers Dr. Peters.

 

[maddogdm]

I posted evidence for my position in my second blog post.

I read Dr Peter’s reference to Raymond Browne in Letter & Spirit and I do not find it convincing (I find his logic a little Irish to be honest). This debate would get interesting if someone tried to explain what is convincing about it. An elaboration from a canonist would help, otherwise I will stay with the advice the Vicar General of the diocese where I consulted (an excellent canonist), who thinks the Saturday vigil is enough to satisfy the obligation this weekend. An elaboration from Dr Ed might be helpful. Any way, many canonists disagree with Browne on things like when the obligation can be fulfilled. Dr Peters disagrees with all the bishops around the world who ordain married deacons without a vow of continence, (and with the opinion of the President of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts as well I might add). I find Peters even more “Ïrish” at times.

That said, there’s no “doubt of law” in regard to whether two Masses are required for two obligations under the current law. Best, edp.

'There is no doubt, I agree, and can.388 §3. and can. 534 §2 back us up on that. One Mass satisfies “two obligations” in some cases. Jimmy Atkins and Fr Z also agree with us that the text clearly reads as saying that the Evening Vigil on Saturday satisfies both Holy Days.

Let’s all just go with the text and context. Most Dioceses are happy to leave it at that. Outside Irish America and Ireland, bishops and canonists ignore the issue. Even in America, the bishops have decided that one mass is normally enough for the two holydays when they fall on consecutive days, and the Holy See is of the same mind.

 

[Lapey]

I read Dr Peter’s reference to Raymond Browne in Letter & Spirit and I do not find it convincing (I find his logic a little Irish to be honest). This debate would get interesting if someone tried to explain what is convincing about it. An elaboration from a canonist would help, otherwise I will stay with the advice the Vicar General of the diocese where I consulted (an excellent canonist), who thinks the Saturday vigil is enough to satisfy the obligation this weekend. An elaboration from Dr Ed might be helpful. Any way, many canonists disagree with Browne on things like when the obligation can be fulfilled. Dr Peters disagrees with all the bishops around the world who ordain married deacons without a vow of continence, (and with the opinion of the President of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts as well I might add). I find Peters even more “Ïrish” at times.

'There is no doubt, I agree, and can.388 §3. and can. 534 §2 back us up on that. One Mass satisfies “two obligations” in some cases. Jimmy Atkins and Fr Z also agree with us that the text clearly reads as saying that the Evening Vigil on Saturday satisfies both Holy Days.

Let’s all just go with the text and context. Most Dioceses are happy to leave it at that. Outside Irish America and Ireland, bishops and canonists ignore the issue. Even in America, the bishops have decided that one mass is normally enough for the two holydays when they fall on consecutive days, and the Holy See is of the same mind.

Dr. Ed Peters is a canonists, you quoted a canonist! It is his words on his blog that we are discussing.