Once again…this is pre-Vatican II teaching.Not entirely. Indeed one’s Sunday obligation is not met unless they’ve arrived at Mass prior to the Offertory. If arrival occurs after the Offertory, the Sunday obligation has not been met.
He goes on to note that we meet our obligation by making a “basic effort” to attend and “especially” if we attend from the Offertory onwards. But as stated above, there is no obligation that you have to attend from the offertory onwards. The requirement that you be present from a certain point onwards went out with Vatican II.“canon law does not indicate anything at all regarding how much of the Mass we need to attend in order to satisfy our Sunday obligation, which also tells us something else: THEY DON’T WANT US SCRUPULING ABOUT THIS POINT. If they wanted us to scruple about it, they would have told us more precisely what is required.”
That is absolutely untrue. Please show me a Church document that states this.Not entirely. Indeed one’s Sunday obligation is not met unless they’ve arrived at Mass prior to the Offertory. If arrival occurs after the Offertory, the Sunday obligation has not been met. It would not be Mortally Sinful unless all other Mass options had been exhausted.
Why are you worrying about yourself when the current correct teaching of the Church, which is that there is no set point when you have to arrive either to meet your obligation OR to receive Holy Communion, has been posted in this thread?I am now worrying about myself after you telling us that it is mortal sin to arrive at mass after the Offertory.
He cannot show you a document because there isn’t one. As you state, his post is untrue.That is absolutely untrue. Please show me a Church document that states this.
You cannot produce a document because it doesn’t exist. YOU ARE WRONG!I don’t need to show any documents; it’s a perennial tenement of the Church handed down to us and is something I’ve myself heard from the Pulpit of my own Deanery. Those suggesting this somehow changed as a result of Vatican II are probably adherents of the false interpretation of Vatican II known as the Bologna School. To suggest on a Catholic website that one can show up basically at any time and still make their obligation, let alone receive communion, is rather worrying. Nothing really “went out with Vatican II;” rather Vatican II is the scapegoat for the abuses we have currently for which there is no basis, some of the worst being the claim that teachings actually changed following Vatican II when all Vatican II did was reaffirm what the Church had already been doing! Chant is still given “price of place” in the Mass and the rubrics still assume the Mass is going to be offered Ad Orientem. Likewise, one makes their Sunday obligation when they’ve arrived to Mass before the Offertory, unless it can be pointed to where the documents of Vatican II suggest this should no longer the case. There is zero to be scrupulous about when it’s so clearly defined; scruples might only come when one can’t get a clear answer. I myself have arrived after the Offertory and therefore mentioned it in my next confession, having refrained from the Eucharist. Life goes on but let’s not mince words and pretend it’s NOT a mortal sin!
Seriously, my personal standard is the Gospel, (I would wait outside and come inside only after the reading ends) after which I would not receive Communion. But that is a personal standard because of my honour for the Eucharist.If you want to hold yourself to lesser standards than our ancestors did for countless generations, go for it. And we’re talking in general terms here; not that one in a million time where one’s car breaks down.
As other people have been saying here, there are no rules against walking into Mass at communion time and receiving the Eucharist, provided all conditions set out in Canon Law are met. If you have fasted for an hour and are not in a state of grave sin, you may receive. This also should apply to Sunday Masses if you were late without fault and/or have every intention of fulfilling your Sunday obligation by attending another Mass if you are able to. If you’re properly disposed in the first place, I would think it is better to receive the Eucharist than not regardless of how late you are to Mass.Someone told me that it was obligatory to be present at Mass since at least the Our Father in order to take communion.
I would just like to point out that it is incorrect to refer to that as “pre-Vatican II teaching.” The idea that “you only meet the obligation if you arrive before the Offertory” was never officially promulgated as a rule by the Church and is present in neither the 1917 nor 1985 Code of Canon Law. It is not and never was the rule of the Church, and it derives only from what was previously done in practice. As Jimmy Akin mentions in the article you linked to:Once again…this is pre-Vatican II teaching.
It is NOT the current rule of the Church.
And because the Church did not require people to hear the Gospel to fulfill their Sunday obligation:Before the liturgy was revised, it was VERY COMMON to have
confessions being heard during the liturgy of the word…and–y’know what?–they DIDN’T stop
confessions during the gospel so people could hear it. Nor did the
Church tell people they had to go to another Mass if they didn’t hear
the gospel.
There is no comparable doubt regarding being present at the Offertory; to be safe I think it’s good to make it a rule to try to go to another Mass if you come after the Offertory has begun. Of course there is, and never was, any official rule regarding the matter, so whether you have attended enough of the Mass to fulfill your Sunday obligation ultimately comes down to the determination of your own conscience.We therefore have a doubt of law, and the law does not bind unless and until Rome clarifies it.
Until then the faithful are not obligated to hear any part of the
liturgy of the word in order to fulfill their Sunday obligation.
Just out of curiosity, do you hold yourself to the same high standards in fasting - do you fast from midnight before receiving Holy Communion, fast on all Ember Days, throughout Lent and Advent, etc., with the same rigor that was expected of our ancestors?Don’t worry about what I did, worry about yourself. If you want to hold yourself to lesser standards than our ancestors did for countless generations, go for it. And we’re talking in general terms here; not that one in a million time where one’s car breaks down.
See, yet another “traditional” rule. There seem to be three or four different rules that were taught, once upon a time.Traditionally, one who enters Mass after the beginning of the Epistle has missed Mass.