Recieving the Eucharist more than once a day and dispensation

  • Thread starter Thread starter jcunningham352
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Let’s get back to what I posted earlier about the canon law professor who made us ask “what value is being protected here?”

With regard to receiving Communion more than twice a day, the value being protected by canon 917 is that Catholics not abuse Holy Communion by receiving too casually and too frequently. For whatever reason, Pope John Paul II decided that twice on a single day would be the limit.

But let’s look at the “value” from the other perspective. Is there a value being protected by telling Catholics (who are otherwise eligible according to the norm of law to be admitted to Holy Communion) that they are prohibited from receiving Communion at what the Church considers to be in-every-way the Mass of Sunday, for no other reason than the simple coincidence that they received Communion 2 times on Saturday?

I ask the question: what is the value of this practice? What “good” is accomplished by prohibiting Catholics from receiving Communion at the Sunday Mass, when those same Catholics are perfectly eligible to receive Communion? Does it make any sense for the Church to say “yes, you can receive Communion at the Sunday Mass, but only at the Mass of Sunday morning, not the Sunday Mass celebrated on Saturday evening”?

The bottom line is this: “What is the essential difference between the Sunday Mass celebrated on Sunday morning, and the Sunday Mass celebrated on Saturday evening?” The Church tells us that there is no difference.

Therefore, my conclusion is that there is likewise no difference between Sunday morning and Saturday evening when a Catholic “counts” the number of times one has received Communion.

Your thoughts?
 
One may not receive Holy Communion 2x on a Saturday and a third time at the Evening Liturgy for Sunday on Saturday evening.

It is not denying them Holy Communion at Sunday Mass. They may attend on Sunday. (And Holy Communion need not be received to fulfill the obligation).

One is speaking of someone who has already received twice that day!!!

If one wanted to get permission for such to happen they would need to apply to Rome for a change in the Law.

For readers.

Besides the actual Code of Canon Law.

And In addition to Helen Hull Hitchcock of Adorumus (whose area is exactly the Liturgy)

Here are examples of others who affirm what I have highlighted from Canon Law.

Catholic Answers: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=44742&highlight=communion+second+time

Jimmy Akin: jimmyakin.org/2005/02/how_many_times_.html

Dr. David M. Gregson, Ph.D. of the EWTN Theology Dept : ewtn.com/vexperts/showresult.asp?RecNum=598265&Forums=0&Experts=0&Days=2010&Author=&Keyword=liturgical+day&pgnu=1&groupnum=0&record_bookmark=1&ORDER_BY_TXT=ORDER+BY+ReplyDate+DESC&start_at=
 
Fr. David

You are addressing your comments to the wrong person.

It is my opinion that the number of times that one may receive communion per day is based on the liturgical day not the calendar day.

To make it perfectly clear: I am in agreement with you!

You keep trying to convince me. I do not know why. As I said in a previous post you are preaching to the converted.

The reason I am discussing Canon 202 with Bookcat and Elizium23 is that they seem to be attempting to make it mean all things to all people.

To resolve this matter I recommend someone sends a dubium or finds one already dealt with.

I do not think Bookcat and Elizium23 will agree with me nor I with them.

As for why you are trying to convince me of something that I have repeatedly said is already my opinion, I do not know.
 
Matthew_Holford said:
Fr. David

You are addressing your comments to the wrong person.

It is my opinion that the number of times that one may receive communion per day is based on the liturgical day not the calendar day.

To make it perfectly clear: I am in agreement with you!

You keep trying to convince me. I do not know why. As I said in a previous post you are preaching to the converted.

The reason I am discussing Canon 202 with Bookcat and Elizium23 is that they seem to be attempting to make it mean all things to all people.

To resolve this matter I recommend someone sends a dubium or finds one already dealt with.

I do not think Bookcat and Elizium23 will agree with me nor I with them.

As for why you are trying to convince me of something that I have repeatedly said is already my opinion, I do not know.
Click to expand...
I’m not saying we disagree. Sorry if I gave that impression.

I’m only asking for your thoughts and making conversation.
 
FrDavid96 said:
Your thoughts?
Click to expand...
Are you saying that it has to be the Sunday Mass celebrated on Saturday evening? By Sunday Mass I mean the liturgical colour, ordinary of the Mass (e.g. Gloria, Credo), orations, and readings of the Sunday.

OR

Are you saying any Mass on Saturday evening that would fulfil the Sunday obligation?

Are you saying that either of these has to be after a certain time, e.g. 4 p.m.?
 
Bookcat said:
For readers.

Besides the actual Code of Canon Law.

And In addition to Helen Hull Hitchcock of Adorumus (whose area is exactly the Liturgy)

Here are examples of others who affirm what I have highlighted from Canon Law.

Catholic Answers: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=44742&highlight=communion+second+time

Jimmy Akin: jimmyakin.org/2005/02/how_many_times_.html

Dr. David M. Gregson, Ph.D. of the EWTN Theology Dept : ewtn.com/vexperts/showresult.asp?RecNum=598265&Forums=0&Experts=0&Days=2010&Author=&Keyword=liturgical+day&pgnu=1&groupnum=0&record_bookmark=1&ORDER_BY_TXT=ORDER+BY+ReplyDate+DESC&start_at=
Click to expand...
As to any who may think otherwise…they are out there in a very small boat.

And if anyone wishes it to be otherwise they may apply to Rome for change in the Law.
 
FrDavid96 said:
Let’s get back to what I posted earlier about the canon law professor who made us ask “what value is being protected here?”…

But let’s look at the “value” from the other perspective. Is there a value being protected by telling Catholics (who are otherwise eligible according to the norm of law to be admitted to Holy Communion) that they are prohibited from receiving Communion at what the Church considers to be in-every-way the Mass of Sunday, for no other reason than the simple coincidence that they received Communion 2 times on Saturday?
Click to expand...
While evaluating what value is being protected may be useful in determining the mind of the pontiff in making a law, it is often the case that negative effects may result from a law, but the law is still the law.

As I understand your approach, Saturday evening masses and Sunday masses are counted the same regarding number of times Holy Communion may be received. So is there a value protected by telling Catholics that they are prohibited from receiving communion Sunday night, for no other reason than the simple coincidence that they received communion at two different wedding masses Saturday evening?

Just because you can cite a case where the effect of a law seems to be contrary to its intent, doesn’t mean that it isn’t a law. I don’t see any good reason why your example of this should carry more weight than my example in interpreting which way the law should be interpreted.
 
Digitonomy said:
While evaluating what value is being protected may be useful in determining the mind of the pontiff in making a law, it is often the case that negative effects may result from a law, but the law is still the law.

As I understand your approach, Saturday evening masses and Sunday masses are counted the same regarding number of times Holy Communion may be received. So is there a value protected by telling Catholics that they are prohibited from receiving communion Sunday night, for no other reason than the simple coincidence that they received communion at two different wedding masses Saturday evening?

Just because you can cite a case where the effect of a law seems to be contrary to its intent, doesn’t mean that it isn’t a law. I don’t see any good reason why your example of this should carry more weight than my example in interpreting which way the law should be interpreted.
Click to expand...
First of all, when you say that “the law is still the law” that presupposes that the law does indeed say that counting Communion must be applied from midnight to midnight. The law does not say this–in spite of repeated claims here that it does. The canon which restricts Communion to twice a day simply does not address the issue of how to interpret a day. Some people may claim that it does, but the simple fact is that it does not.

What I am saying here–and I must note that not one single person has offered anything to dispute this: is that the Church considers the entire Mass on Saturday evening to the the Sunday Mass. Everything, yes literally everything about the Saturday evening Mass is regarded by the Church as being in fact, the Mass of Sunday. So, there is ample precedent and indeed the widespread practice of the Church that the Saturday evening Mass is the Sunday Mass. Every part of that Mass, when one asks “what day is today?” is answered by “today is Sunday.”

There is a principle in canon law which states that whatever applies to the whole of something also applies to every part of the whole. As I’ve said before, every part of the Saturday evening Mass is “Sunday” in the eyes of the Church. However, in spite of this widespread and never-in-dispute practice of the Church, there are some who would have us believe that there is one single exception to this, that one exception being counting the number of times one has received Communion in a day.

Let me give an example. Let’s say that Saturday is the feast of a martyr. That would make the liturgical color of the day red (naturally). The next day is a Sunday in Ordinary Time. What color vestments are worn on Saturday evening? Of course, the answer is Green. Not red. Why not? Because the Church says that the Mass of Saturday evening is the Mass of Sunday, and therefore every liturgical question about that Mass is answered from the perspective of “today is Sunday.”

Now, if someone were to come along and say “no, canon 202 says that a day is calculated from midnight to midnight, therefore the priest must wear red vestments.” How would most Catholics react? Surely, we would all say “that’s not what canon 202 means” All questions about the Saturday evening Mass are answered from the perspective of Sunday.

If one takes ANY question about the Saturday Mass, ANY QUESTION AT ALL and asks it about the Saturday evening Mass, the response would always be from the perspective that the Saturday Mass is the Mass of Sunday. The only exceptions would be those rare times when Saturday is a solemnity–but that takes us completely off-topic.
 
FrDavid96 said:
First of all, when you say that “the law is still the law” that presupposes that the law does indeed say that counting Communion must be applied from midnight to midnight. The law does not say this–in spite of repeated claims here that it does. The canon which restricts Communion to twice a day simply does not address the issue of how to interpret a day. Some people may claim that it does, but the simple fact is that it does not.
Click to expand...
Despite your variant opinion.

Such is the Law and such is understood out there in the theological world as the law.

For readers.

Besides the actual Code of Canon Law.

And In addition to Helen Hull Hitchcock of Adorumus (whose area is exactly the Liturgy)

Here are examples of others who affirm what I have highlighted from Canon Law.

Catholic Answers: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=44742&highlight=communion+second+time

Jimmy Akin: jimmyakin.org/2005/02/how_many_times_.html

Dr. David M. Gregson, Ph.D. of the EWTN Theology Dept : ewtn.com/vexperts/showresult.asp?RecNum=598265&Forums=0&Experts=0&Days=2010&Author=&Keyword=liturgical+day&pgnu=1&groupnum=0&record_bookmark=1&ORDER_BY_TXT=ORDER+BY+ReplyDate+DESC&start_at=

As to any who may think otherwise…they are out there in a very small boat.

And if anyone wishes it to be otherwise they may apply to Rome for change in the Law
 
Allow me to pose some questions here for our readers and posters. Please think about this.

Let’s say that a priest celebrates Mass on Saturday evening at 7:00 PM. That Saturday is in Ordinary Time, and there is no particular celebration on that day–no saint, no solemnity, etc. Just a plain weekday in Ordinary Time. Let’s likewise say that the Sunday is a regular Sunday in Ordinary Time; no solemnity, no major feast, etc.

In preparing for the Mass, let’s ask some questions.

What collect is prayed?
What prayer over the gifts is prayed?
What post Communion prayer is prayed?
What Gospel is proclaimed?
What is the first reading?
What is the Psalm?
What is the second reading?
Which Eucharistic prayers may or may not be used?
Is the homily required?
Is the Creed required?
Is the Gloria required?
Are the General Intercessions required?
What color vestments are worn?
Does attending this Mass fulfill the Sunday obligation?
Is a Votive Mass permitted?
Is a Mass for the Dead permitted?
Is a ritual Mass permitted?

I submit that every single question above, and any others that anyone cares to add, would be answered from the perspective of “this is the Mass of Sunday, therefore all those questions are answered in terms of the Sunday Mass.” True or not true?

Of course, we all know that it’s true.

What then sets apart the one question “if a Catholic received Communion twice on Saturday morning, may that Catholic receive Communion at this Mass?” any different than any other question above???

What sets this one question apart from all the others? What distinguishes this one question from everything else about that particular Mass?

WHAT???

Again I will note that not a single poster here who holds a contrary view to the one I’ve presented has made even the slightest attempt to dispute what I keep posting: Whatever applies to the whole, applies to every part of the whole.
 
Such is the Law and such is understood out there in the theological world as the law.

For readers.

Besides the actual Code of Canon Law.

And In addition to Helen Hull Hitchcock of Adorumus (whose area is exactly the Liturgy)

Here are examples of others who affirm what I have highlighted from Canon Law.

Catholic Answers: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=44742&highlight=communion+second+time

Jimmy Akin: jimmyakin.org/2005/02/how_many_times_.html

Dr. David M. Gregson, Ph.D. of the EWTN Theology Dept : ewtn.com/vexperts/showresult.asp?RecNum=598265&Forums=0&Experts=0&Days=2010&Author=&Keyword=liturgical+day&pgnu=1&groupnum=0&record_bookmark=1&ORDER_BY_TXT=ORDER+BY+ReplyDate+DESC&start_at=

As to any who may think otherwise…they are out there in a very small boat.
**
And if anyone wishes it to be otherwise they may apply to Rome for change in the Law**
 
Matthew_Holford said:
Are you saying that it has to be the Sunday Mass celebrated on Saturday evening? By Sunday Mass I mean the liturgical colour, ordinary of the Mass (e.g. Gloria, Credo), orations, and readings of the Sunday.

OR

Are you saying any Mass on Saturday evening that would fulfil the Sunday obligation?

Are you saying that either of these has to be after a certain time, e.g. 4 p.m.?
Click to expand...
What I’m saying is that the liturgical day begins “at the time of First Vespers on Saturday.”

Any Mass celebrated on Saturday evening (ie, “after the time of First Vespers” is the Mass of Sunday. Can it be a wedding Mass (the typical example)? Or can it be a funeral? Or can it be an Ordination Mass? It may be. The same rules for a wedding Mass on Sunday afternoon apply to a wedding Mass on Saturday evening (after the time of First Vespers). Some bishops prohibit wedding Masses on Saturday evening to avoid confusion, but that’s a different matter altogether.

The point is that liturgically speaking, there is no difference between Sunday morning, Sunday afternoon, or Saturday after the time of First Vespers. They are all “Sunday” as far as the Church is concerned

In other words, what I’m saying is that if we ask the question “can the priest substitute the Gospel of the ritual Mass for the Gospel of the day?” The answer would be the same whether the Mass happens on Sat. evening or Sun. morning.
 
Such is the Law and such is understood out there in the theological world as the law.

For readers.

Besides the actual Code of Canon Law.

And In addition to Helen Hull Hitchcock of Adorumus (whose area is exactly the Liturgy)

Here are examples of others who affirm what I have highlighted from Canon Law.

Catholic Answers: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=44742&highlight=communion+second+time

Jimmy Akin: jimmyakin.org/2005/02/how_many_times_.html

Dr. David M. Gregson, Ph.D. of the EWTN Theology Dept : ewtn.com/vexperts/showresult.asp?RecNum=598265&Forums=0&Experts=0&Days=2010&Author=&Keyword=liturgical+day&pgnu=1&groupnum=0&record_bookmark=1&ORDER_BY_TXT=ORDER+BY+ReplyDate+DESC&start_at=

As to any who may think otherwise…they are out there in a very small boat.
**
And if anyone wishes it to be otherwise they may apply to Rome for change in the Law**
 
Digitonomy said:
While evaluating what value is being protected may be useful in determining the mind of the pontiff in making a law, it is often the case that negative effects may result from a law, but the law is still the law.

As I understand your approach, Saturday evening masses and Sunday masses are counted the same regarding number of times Holy Communion may be received. So is there a value protected by telling Catholics that they are prohibited from receiving communion Sunday night, for no other reason than the simple coincidence that they received communion at two different wedding masses Saturday evening?

Just because you can cite a case where the effect of a law seems to be contrary to its intent, doesn’t mean that it isn’t a law. I don’t see any good reason why your example of this should carry more weight than my example in interpreting which way the law should be interpreted.
Click to expand...
Correct. Such is the Law and no one has the authority to change it (or re-interp it) except the Holy See
 
The Faithful may receive Communion a second time only in a Mass they participate in that day. And day is understood in Canon Law regarding this …as running from midnight to midnight.

What may happen:
  1. Morning Communion (at Mass or outside), and evening Communion at Mass for Sunday.
  2. Morning Communion (at Mass or outside), Communion at Mass at anytime in day (such as wedding etc…but need not be “some special occasion”).
  3. Morning Communion (at Mass or outside), and evening Communion at Mass for Sunday. And then the next day (Sunday) Morning Communion (at Mass or outside), Communion at Mass at anytime in day (such as some special celebration…but need not be “some special occasion”).
  4. Communion a third time for those who are in danger of death (viaticum) on either Saturday or Sunday.
What may not happen:
  1. Morning Communion (at Mass or outside), Communion at a Mass in the afternoon say at a wedding and evening Communion at Mass for Sunday.
  2. Morning Communion (at Mass or outside), and again at Mass in the morning (etc) and then at evening Communion at Mass for Sunday.
  3. Morning Communion (at Mass or outside) (or communion at any time) and then Communion again outside Mass (unless as viaticum).
  4. Communion in the Morning, then again at Mass at noon and then again at Mass in the Evening. (Communion may only happen a third time on a 24 hour day --midnight to midnight- if it is viaticum for those who are in danger of death…but not a forth time.)
 
Can. 1247 On Sundays and other holy days of obligation, the faithful are obliged to participate in the Mass.

Moreover, they are to abstain from those works and affairs which hinder the worship to be rendered to God, the joy proper to the Lord’s day, or the suitable relaxation of mind and body.

Can. 1248 §1. A person who assists at a Mass celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite either on the feast day itself or in the evening of the preceding day satisfies the obligation of participating in the Mass.

Such is how Canon Law refers to it. And it is Canon Law that determines how many times a day one may receive…and what that day means regarding such.

Also note …the we are also not obliged to rest until midnight when Sunday itself begins.
 
FrDavid96 said:
…

What sets this one question apart from all the others? What distinguishes this one question from everything else about that particular Mass?

WHAT???

Again I will note that not a single poster here who holds a contrary view to the one I’ve presented has made even the slightest attempt to dispute what I keep posting: Whatever applies to the whole, applies to every part of the whole.
Click to expand...
Canon law 917 sets it apart. Whatever value this canon is meant to promote is present whether or not we’re talking about a Saturday evening Mass. I don’t know why it would disappear in some circumstances.

Where can I find this principle you mention at the end? I don’t know the code of canon law that well.

The Mass happens on Saturday. The entirety of the Mass happens on Saturday, the reception of Communion happens on Saturday. If someone goes to a Saturday, 7 pm Mass and is later asked “What day of the week did you go to Mass?” the person will always say “Saturday.” If he went to Mass twice already that day and is asked “how many times did you go to Mass on Saturday?” he’d say “three.” “How many times did you receive Communion that day?” “Three.”

Maybe I’m too simplistic to understand all this.
 
This issue’s resolution cannot be found here. I direct all interested to inquiry in the Ask An Apologist forum or their own diocese. Thank you to all who participated. This thread is now closed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top