Receiving Eucharist multiple times in a day

[Incomplete]

I mean, seriously here, I find it hard to believe that you don’t see Sunday as being more important than other days of the week.

I can’t speak for Georgias, but for me (because I said something similar) I always thought it was worship on Sunday that’s important, not necessarily receiving Eucharist. In fact, there was a time in the Church when people didn’t receive Eucharist all that often.

I guess it’s hard to wrap my ahead around that receiving Jesus would be more important on some days than others. To worship that day and keep it holy through worship, to say it is a more important day overall, I understand that. But that it there is something more worthy in receiving at one time on a Saturday than another…I guess I can’t wrap my mind around the concept that each time we receive Jesus is, well, just as special as any other time, if that makes sense. I’m not saying you are necessarily wrong, but it is difficult to understand.

Though overall I think this digresses from the overall question on the thread. My apologies for that. I’m just trying to understand more fully. But now it’s time to say goodnight!

 

[FrDavid96]

My point, though, about going three times on a Saturday, is that people doing that can still receive on the Vigil Mass. They just have to refrain on one of the Saturday Masses. I only bring it up in light of the comments about the law not wanting to prevent people from participating fully.

I’ll use the first person to illustrate the point. Let’s say that I’m not a priest (because different laws do apply to priests here because we must celebrate Masses for our congregations).

Let’s say that I am an elderly person, the kind who picks up the paper every day and looks first at the obituaries to see how many of his friends died yesterday.

Two more of my friends just died. One funeral Mass is at St. Mary’s at 9 AM, the other funeral Mass is at St. Joseph’s at 11 AM. Both today (Saturday)
I would like to attend both of my friends’ funerals. I would like to receive Communion at both Masses. Certainly, there’s a value in this.
So I do just that. I attend both funerals and I receive Communion at both.

Now, I still need to fulfill my Sunday obligation. I cannot attend the Sunday morning Masses, but I’m able to attend the Sunday Mass at 5 PM on Saturday evening.

Now, let’s keep in mind that the Church tells me that I can attend all 3 Masses. The Church tells me that when I attend the evening Mass, it counts for my Sunday obligation. The Church tells me that everything about the evening Mass is that it is the Mass of Sunday. It’s not the “anticipated Mass” like it was before the 1983 Code—instead, it’s now the Mass of the feastday of Sunday.

I read the comments on CAF and I conclude that I must make a decision to refrain from Communion at one of those Masses.

You see: the problem here is that the obligation to refrain from receiving at one of the Saturday Masses is not something that the Church tells me. It’s something that a poster on CAF tells me because that person wants to protect the value of “I say midnight to midnight period”; it’s not because that person is concerned about the good of my soul.

I do understand that the Church teaches it is more important to worship on the Lord’s day than others, but did not realize the Church teaches that it is more important to receive Eucharist on that day than on other days, to the extent that it is more important to receive on a Vigil Mass then receiving earlier in the day. Is that also in Canon Law? Or the Catechism? Or elsewhere? What I am asking is, how is a person to know that?

I do appreciate your dialogue.

I’m not saying that “it is more important to receive on a Vigil Mass then receiving earlier in the day” so I cannot say where that comes from.

Instead, I’m saying that a Catholic can receive Communion twice on Saturday and then receive Holy Communion when he participates in the Mass-of-Sunday, even if that Mass-of-Sunday just happens to occur on Saturday evening.

 

[FrDavid96]

Agreed. For the purposes of liturgical norms, “midnight to midnight” does not hold – vigil Masses are, in fact, Masses of the celebration which they ‘anticipate’.

That is the point. The Saturday evening Mass is the Mass of Sunday. It’s not the Mass of Saturday.

Ok, then: when you celebrate Mass on Saturday morning and then a vigil Mass on Saturday evening, do you binate? When you celebrate a vigil Mass on Saturday evening and two Masses on Sunday, do you binate or trinate?

It’s not relevant because we’re talking about different laws which have entirely different purposes and which protect different values.
The purpose of the law limiting how many Masses a priest may say on a given day is to protect the priest from being overworked. The purpose of the law limiting Communion to twice a day is to protect against the false-value of too-frequent reception of Holy Communion. They may seem similar, but they’re not.

Agreed. And, “for the good of souls,” Catholics are only two receive communion a maximum of twice in a day.

Agreed? Yes. But the difference is in how to define that “day.”

True; but that doesn’t mean that the two, considered together, trump canon law. Marriage is permitted to single men; holy orders are normatively given to single men; this does not imply that marriage and holy orders are normatively given to single men…

I’m not suggesting that it “trumps” canon law—I am saying that this is how the law should be interpreted. Huge difference.

You’re changing the playing field, aren’t you? The question isn’t which Mass is most oriented to the good of the souls, it’s whether reception more than twice is. If you wish to make the argument that it would be better to defer receiving Communion at one of the Saturday morning or afternoon Masses, in order to receive Communion at the vigil Mass, then you could make that argument (and, in fact, I’d agree with you). However, we’re not arguing “don’t receive Communion at the vigil Mass,” but rather, simply “don’t receive Communion more than twice in a day.” Big difference.

The debate is about what constitutes “more than twice a day.” It’s not about whether “more than twice a day” is right or wrong (the Church says no more than twice, and that’s not in dispute).

Well, that’s begging the question now, isn’t it? Yet, it’s not that “everything about that Mass pertains to Sunday”! The obligation to assist at Mass – that is, a consideration that is part of liturgical law – is met by assisting at any Mass from sundown Saturday through Sunday. But, the readings at the Mass do not have to be the readings for the Sunday celebration: if one should attend an evening Nuptial Mass on Saturday, then the obligation to assist at Mass has been met. Yet, the readings for the Nuptial Mass aren’t (necessarily!) the readings for that Sunday’s celebration. So, it’s not the case that “everything about that Mass” on Saturday evening “pertains to Sunday”, although the obligation to assist, does!

No, it’s not begging the question. Instead, it’s explaining the situation.

The Church has laws about what may or may not happen on Sunday with regard to weddings. The way that the Church applies these laws go more toward proving my point than proving the contrary.

You see, this is how it works:

When a wedding is scheduled for Saturday at 10 AM, the liturgical laws for weddings on a Saturday apply.

When a wedding occurs on a Saturday at 5 PM, the liturgical laws for a wedding on Sunday are what apply.

That means that if I celebrate the wedding Mass at 10 AM on Saturday, I can use the full nuptial Mass, including all the readings and presidential prayers.

If I celebrate a wedding Mass at 5 PM on a Saturday, then the norms for that Sunday apply. The Saturday norms are irrelevant. I can only take limited parts of the wedding Mass and incorporate them into the Mass on Saturday evening. This is the same thing that happens when the nuptial Mass happens on Sunday afternoon.

It’s what I’ve been saying all along: whatever applies to the whole applies to every part of the whole.

I completely agree. And, for the good of souls, we’re not to receive Communion more than twice a day. Simple, when you get right down to it!

Right. And if you want to receive on Sunday, then the fact that you received on Saturday has no bearing.

Anyway: it is BEYOND late in my time-zone. Good night.

 

[Vico]

Only, it’s NOT the Church that’s saying “midnight to midnight.” You are saying that, and others here are saying that. But the Church does not say it.
In order to come to that conclusion, you have to erase one sentence clause (unless other provision…) and then combine two canons into one. That’s what people are doing here.

The Church is not the one saying “you can receive twice from midnight to midnight”—posters are saying that because it is their interpretation of the canons.

True. But I fail to see how that has any relevance to the question of what happens when a person receives Communion twice on Saturday morning, then attends the Sunday Mass on Saturday evening of the same day.

You’re doing it again.

You start a sentence with the words “The Church has a preference for…” or “The Church says…” then you take the liberty of adding your own words “midnight to midnight.”

You might be getting those words from canon law (indeed, they are there) but you’re combining two different laws into one.

The canon on calculating time has the clause “unless other provision is made” But you’re just snipping that out as if it weren’t there.

That’s why I take such issue with statements like “The Church has a preference for communion only once on a day (midnight to midnight)” The Church does not say that. That’s your interpretation.

There is no exception made for the day to being earlier than midnight. Can 921.2 states “can receive it again (iterum) on the same day**”** rather than during the celebration of the sam Sunday or Holy Day.Both the liturgical law and canon law state that a day is midnight to midnight. The celebration begins earlier than the day, explicitly stated. By prefers I mean the traditional practice of communion once a day IMMENSAE CARITATIS (January 29, 1973) stated: “Like a provident mother, the Church has established from centuries-old practice and has received into its canon law a norm according to which it is lawful for the faithful to receive communion only once a day. That norm remains unchanged and is not to be disregarded simply for reasons of devotion.”
ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/P12CHDOM.HTM

However at that time gave “broader faculty to receive communion twice in a day”.

Although the laws have been changing so now one can normally receive twice a day.

The day per the 1917 canon law also specified midnight start. 1917 CIC Can. 1246 The calculation of feast days and likewise days of abstinence and fast is to be made from midnight up to midnight with due regard for the prescription of Canon 923. [Can. 923 is about the allowable time to gain indulgences on a day.]
1917 CIC Can. 32.1 A day consists of 24 continuous hours, calculated from midnight; a week is 7 days.
An example from Ed. Peters, JD, JCD, Ref. Sig. Ap. on how the time canon is applied is here, with a similar issue of mass attendance:

canonlawblog.wordpress.com/2012/12/04/1964/Exceptions to law (and c. 202 § 1 alerts us to the possibility of exceptions to the midnight-to-midnight day in canon law) must not be expanded beyond their terms, per c. 18. That liturgical law calls for Sunday propers to be applied on Saturday evenings (assuming that even counts as an ‘exception’ to law, and I’m not sure it does), would not allow one to parlay said ‘exception’ in liturgical law into an exception in the canon law governing the satisfaction of Mass attendance obligations; they are, indisputably, different laws serving distinct purposes.

 

[Incomplete]

Let’s say that I am an elderly person, the kind who picks up the paper every day and looks first at the obituaries to see how many of his friends died yesterday.

Two more of my friends just died. One funeral Mass is at St. Mary’s at 9 AM, the other funeral Mass is at St. Joseph’s at 11 AM. Both today (Saturday)
I would like to attend both of my friends’ funerals. I would like to receive Communion at both Masses. Certainly, there’s a value in this.
So I do just that. I attend both funerals and I receive Communion at both.

Now, I still need to fulfill my Sunday obligation. I cannot attend the Sunday morning Masses, but I’m able to attend the Sunday Mass at 5 PM on Saturday evening.

I read the comments on CAF and I conclude that I must make a decision to refrain from Communion at one of those Masses.

See, I’m still not seeing the difference between receiving Eucharist at the 9 a.m. and the Vigil vs at the 9 a.m. and the 11 a.m. You might desire to receive at all three, but if the Church tells you that you cannot, then you make a decision of which ones to receive Eucharist at.

You see: the problem here is that the obligation to refrain from receiving at one of the Saturday Masses is not something that the Church tells me. It’s something that a poster on CAF tells me because that person wants to protect the value of “I say midnight to midnight period”; it’s not because that person is concerned about the good of my soul.

But somewhere back in the comments someone quoted a priest who was a canon lawyer saying that the Church says we can’t receive more than twice in 24 hours. So people are just trying to understand…which is it? Because in either the case you quoted or the situation I was in, in one or the other we have to make a decision. In fact, our Director of Music is often there for three or four Masses, starting with the Vigil Mass. (She plays piano). This is probably fairly common. If it is a liturgical day, then she can receive on Vigil and only once on Sunday. If it is 24 hours she can receive twice on Sunday. It makes a difference.

I’m not saying that “it is more important to receive on a Vigil Mass then receiving earlier in the day” so I cannot say where that comes from

.

This was implied when you said that if I was to go to Vigil Mass and two Sunday Masses, at least I always have the option to receive on Sunday liturgy. If someone receives twice on Saturday and then goes to the Vigil Mass, they cannot receive for the Sunday liturgy. I don’t see why this matters unless receiving on Sunday is more important than receiving on Saturday. You said this in defense of the law referring to liturgical day rather than midnight to midnight, when I was failing to see why it is significant that they could not receive on the Vigil when they had already received twice.

Instead, I’m saying that a Catholic can receive Communion twice on Saturday and then receive Holy Communion when he participates in the Mass-of-Sunday, even if that Mass-of-Sunday just happens to occur on Saturday evening.

But if they go to Vigil and two Sunday Masses, like I have and like our director of music frequently does, then they still have to make a decision not to receive at one of them.

Regarding the elderly person attending a funeral, I think we are not understanding each other. I get your point, but I am trying to say that if the law is 24 hours, then the elderly person can still decide to receive at Vigil by refraining at one of the funerals. I don’t see the difference between that or people like our music director refraining at a Sunday liturgy.

Yet none of that makes a difference if the law actually says it’s a liturgical day. And that’s where I’m seeing that there seems to be confusion as to what the law actually says. I only brought up the thing of those of us going to 3 Sunday liturgies because you had mentioned that it prevents people from fully participating (in the case of the elderly folks you use as an analogy)…I was trying to say that either way can prevent folks from receiving Eucharist at some point.

 

[dans0622]

… there seems to be confusion as to what the law actually says. …

Hello,

Not really. The text is clear. I’ll say that there has been more virtual ink spilled here in these forums on this topic than in any canon law commentary or journal and more conversation here than in any canon law class anywhere.

Dan