Rationale for removing Obligation from Jan 1

[JimR-OCDS]

benedictgal

I was questioning it, not making a statement.

Sorry you took it as a blanket statement, it was not meant that way and I’m not trying to be an odd ball.

Jim

 

[1ke]

Br. Rich, can you tell us what is the state of an individual bishop who defies the decree which has been confirmed by The Apostolic See?

The bishop absolutely **does **have the authority to dispense the obligation in their diocese. See Canon 87.

And, in reverse, he can also set his own law in his diocese regarding retaining of a Holy Day dispensed or transferred by others. For example, the Conference of Bishops transferred Ascension to Sunday, however several individual Bishops retained Thursday as as Holy Day of Obligation in their diocese.

Bishops have very broad powers in their own diocese, I think people need to remember that.

 

[1ke]

Disobedient

Bro Rich, this is incorrect.

Bishops have the power to dispense from universal or particular disciplinary laws in their own diocese.

 

[Brendan]

Those who cannot attend Mass.

Those who CANNOT are already under no obligation. The Church does not compel what cannot be acomplished.

The question is about those who are able but WILL NOT.

 

[jfallaw]

Corpus Christi is NOT a holy day of obligation “everywhere in the world.” In some countries it is, while in others it is not. That has always been the case.

canon 1246 of the Code of Canon Law:

§1. Sunday, on which by apostolic tradition the paschal mystery is celebrated, must be observed in the universal Church as the primordial holy day of obligation. The following days must also be observed: the Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Epiphany, the Ascension, the Body and Blood of Christ, Holy Mary the Mother of God, her Immaculate Conception, her Assumption, Saint Joseph, Saint Peter and Saint Paul the Apostles, and All Saints.
§2. With the prior approval of the Apostolic See, however, the conference of bishops can suppress some of the holy days of obligation or transfer them to a Sunday.

Corpus Christi is a Holy Day of Obligation EVERYWHERE in the world, where it has not been ‘suppressed’ by the local bishops.

 

[jfallaw]

You are incorrect.

Well, that may be what you “heard” but it is not based in fact.

And, Holy Days have not been civil holidays in most countries in several centuries if they ever were-- it varies greatly from country to country.

I never said Obligation days were civil holidays. Quite the contrary- people would be forced to choose between their jobs and their Church. That was my point. So the bishops were granted dispensation to move the feast to Sunday (already a day of obligation), which should have been good enough, but they actually do away with it in places, which is ****. If it is true that the dispensation was granted so that we don’t have to commit a mortal sin by working, then my statement was, indeed, based 110% in fact.

 

[1ke]

I never said Obligation days were civil holidays. Quite the contrary- people would be forced to choose between their jobs and their Church. That was my point.

If one cannot attend Mass due to work there is no obligation. Therefore, there would be no mortal sin if one had to work and could not attend Mass.

One does not have to choose between their jobs and their Church.

So the bishops were granted dispensation to move the feast to Sunday (already a day of obligation), which should have been good enough, but they actually do away with it in places, which is ****.

A statement such as this show complete disrespect for the authority of the Bishops.

The feast is not “done away with”-- it is still on the liturgical calendar and anyone who wants to celebrate it can go to Mass. Merely the *obligation *to attend Mass is removed.

If it is true that the dispensation was granted so that we don’t have to commit a mortal sin by working, then my statement was, indeed, based 110% in fact.

It is not true. As has already been pointed out-- there is no obligation if one is *unable *to attend Mass.

 

[1ke]

Those who CANNOT are already under no obligation. The Church does not compel what cannot be acomplished.

Yes, I am aware of that. Perhaps I should have qualified-- scrupulous people who fret unnecessarily that they are committing a sin when they cannot attend Mass. Many of them are posters here.

 

[1ke]

Corpus Christi is a Holy Day of Obligation EVERYWHERE in the world, where it has not been ‘suppressed’ by the local bishops.

Well, since you are being so picky, no it is not a Holy Day of Obligation “everywhere”-- it is only a Holy Day of Obligation in the Latin Rite.

It is not a Holy Day of Obligation under the code of canon law for the Oriental Churches. Under their code of canon law, the Holy Days of Obligation common to all are: Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Epiphany, the Ascension, the Dormition of the Holy Mary Mother of God, and the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul.

 

[jfallaw]

If one cannot attend Mass due to work there is no obligation. Therefore, there would be no mortal sin if one had to work and could not attend Mass.

One does not have to choose between their jobs and their Church.

that makes sense. But why not just move it to Sunday? Why dispense with the obligation? I do not believe the dispensation was granted so that bishops could change the canon, only make it more convenient for their dioceses.

 

[1ke]

that makes sense. But why not just move it to Sunday? Why dispense with the obligation?

The Feast of the Holy Family was celebrated last Sunday and the Feast of the Epiphany is this coming Sunday. Therefore, “moving” the feast to Sunday could be done, but it would have to replace one of these other feasts.

The feast remained on it’s day, celebrated fully, only the *obligation *to attend Mass was dispensed in this case. And, we don’t even know where “this case” is b/c the OP did not give his location.