Saturday Mass ok?

[Mike_O]

There are far too many people on this thread equating Saturday Mass attendance with deep spiritual problems, personality issues such as laziness, or imperfect devotion to the Lord.

It’s about time that the judgment stopped; the Church has spoken, and that is enough. Trying to read someone else’s intentions for one Mass over the other or revise their preferences based on what YOU–not the Church–considers appropriate is misguided and unchristian.

 

[Sherlock]

Mike O:

There are far too many people on this thread equating Saturday Mass attendance with deep spiritual problems, personality issues such as laziness, or imperfect devotion to the Lord.

It’s about time that the judgment stopped; the Church has spoken, and that is enough. Trying to read someone else’s intentions for one Mass over the other or revise their preferences based on what YOU–not the Church–considers appropriate is misguided and unchristian.

I, for one, am not equating Saturday Mass attendance with “deep spiritual problems”. That would be odd, as I attend Saturday Mass frequently. The original poster made it quite clear that he was only attending Mass on Saturdays so that he could sleep in on Sundays, so there’s been no need to second-guess his motives, “trying to read someone else’s intentions”, and assume the worst: he’s made it clear to us. The real question is: is his reason a good one? My priest, a very solid and orthodox priest, would say “no”. I would agree with him. But I wouldn’t see it as necessarily indicative of a “deep” spiritual problem—I didn’t use that adjective, you came up with it. I wouldn’t use the word “deep”, myself. And it is not “wrong” to attend Saturday Mass for those reasons in the legal sense (as regards canon law). Since the poster wanted our (name removed by moderator)ut on this, I don’t see that (name removed by moderator)ut as either misguided or unchristian. If he didn’t want (name removed by moderator)ut, it wouldn’t have made sense for him to ask for it.

 

[fix]

I like to beat a dead horse:

1. Because the faithful are obliged to attend Mass unless there is a grave impediment, Pastors have the corresponding duty to offer to everyone the real possibility of fulfilling the precept. The provisions of Church law move in this direction, as for example in the faculty granted to priests, with the prior authorization of the diocesan Bishop, to celebrate more than one Mass on Sundays and holy days,(85) the institution of evening Masses(86) and the provision which allows the obligation to be fulfilled from Saturday evening onwards, starting at the time of First Vespers of Sunday.(87) From a liturgical point of view, in fact, holy days begin with First Vespers.(88) Consequently, the liturgy of what is sometimes called the “Vigil Mass” is in effect the “festive” Mass of Sunday, at which the celebrant is required to preach the homily and recite the Prayer of the Faithful.
   vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_05071998_dies-domini_en.html

Now, the OP asked if convenience, like sleeping in, was a reason to attend the vigil mass. Not only legally, but I see no other reason why such thinking is incorrect? As long as he/she keeps the Sunday holy why is it wrong to attend mass on Saturday eve or Sunday night in place of the 6-12 slot on Sunday morning?

 

[Sherlock]

fix:

I like to beat a dead horse:

Now, the OP asked if convenience, like sleeping in, was a reason to attend the vigil mass. Not only legally, but I see no other reason why such thinking is incorrect? As long as he/she keeps the Sunday holy why is it wrong to attend mass on Saturday eve or Sunday night in place of the 6-12 slot on Sunday morning?

You’re beating a different horse. I never claimed that attending the Saturday vigil for reasons of convenience was wrong in the sense that it was forbidden by canon law. I simply don’t think it’s spiritually healthy. If you think that there’s nothing wrong with that attitude above and beyond the strictly legal, then I simply disagree, based on my priest’s thoughts on the matter, and after considering Church teaching about the importance of Sunday. And I would point out that it is stretching the definition of “evening” to call a 4:30 Mass on a summer afternoon an “evening” Mass. Sure, it may be “legal”, but in my mind it violates the intention of a vigil Mass. That’s just my opinion. You disagree, but you haven’t said anything that convinces me otherwise, and in fact are reminding me of the dangers of a minimalist faith that seeks to go by the book and no further.

 

[fix]

Sherlock:

You’re beating a different horse. I never claimed that attending the Saturday vigil for reasons of convenience was wrong in the sense that it was forbidden by canon law. I simply don’t think it’s spiritually healthy. If you think that there’s nothing wrong with that attitude above and beyond the strictly legal, then I simply disagree, based on my priest’s thoughts on the matter, and after considering Church teaching about the importance of Sunday. And I would point out that it is stretching the definition of “evening” to call a 4:30 Mass on a summer afternoon an “evening” Mass. Sure, it may be “legal”, but in my mind it violates the intention of a vigil Mass. That’s just my opinion. You disagree, but you haven’t said anything that convinces me otherwise, and in fact are reminding me of the dangers of a minimalist faith that seeks to go by the book and no further.

But, it is not minimalism. Why is attending mass on Sunday morning more efficacious for the OP than Saturday eve? How is that any more holy or spiritually benefitting him than going on Saturday?

As for legalisms it seems you want to be a stricter interpreter than the Church?

 

[Sherlock]

fix:

But, it is not minimalism. Why is attending mass on Sunday morning more efficacious for the OP than Saturday eve? How is that any more holy or spiritually benefitting him than going on Saturday? ?

If you can’t see the worth of making Sunday as God-centered as possible, than there’s nothing I can say.

fix:

As for legalisms it seems you want to be a stricter interpreter than the Church?

I’m not offering any legalisms, nor am I advocating any changes to canon law, stricter or otherwise. You insist on looking at this only in terms of what is and is not required by canon law. I’m sorry to see that.

 

[Gray_Sparrow]

Polska:

Is it ok to go to mass on saturday at night (6:30) instead of going sunday morning only due to convenience ie. I dont feel like waking up in the morning? Does this meet the “keep the sabbath day holy” commandment?

Ask your Bishop, he could allow it .

 

[fix]

Sherlock:

If you can’t see the worth of making Sunday as God-centered as possible, than there’s nothing I can say.

Attending a vigil mass does not make Sunday less God centered.

I’m not offering any legalisms, nor am I advocating any changes to canon law, stricter or otherwise. You insist on looking at this only in terms of what is and is not required by canon law. I’m sorry to see that.

Nope, that is only part of the reasoning. Going to a Vigil mass is not doing less than is required. The OP asked a sepecfic question and I think it is not fair to tell him/her that in some way it is somehow superior to attend the Sunday morning mass when you have given no reasonable explanation other than the experience of getting up at a certain time is more beneficial. While agree these small items may benefit a person to grow in holiness, such things are a matter of prudence and will vary from person to person and circumstance to circumstance.

If someone wants to mortify themselves by taking a cold shower, or getting up as soon as the alarm goes off, or going to an early mass instead of sleeping in I think that is great.

The OP asked a specific question and I have not read anything that says he will be not fulfilling his obligation by doing what he asked.

 

[Sherlock]

fix:

The OP asked a sepecfic question and I think it is not fair to tell him/her that in some way it is somehow superior to attend the Sunday morning mass when you have given no reasonable explanation other than the experience of getting up at a certain time is more beneficial. While agree these small items may benefit a person to grow in holiness, such things are a matter of prudence and will vary from person to person and circumstance to circumstance…

So, as you’ve just figured out (finally–thank you) it’s a matter of opinion, isn’t it? That’s all I have given–my opinion. Canon law is quite another thing.

fix:

The OP asked a specific question and I have not read anything that says he will be not fulfilling his obligation by doing what he asked.

Not according to canon law, no. But ask some priests and you may get a different (prudential) answer in regards to whether it’s conducive to the spirit of the Sunday obligation. Why should I accept your opinion over the opinion of my very holy and very orthodox priest?

 

[fix]

Sherlock:

So, as you’ve just figured out (finally–thank you) it’s a matter of opinion, isn’t it? That’s all I have given–my opinion. Canon law is quite another thing.

An opinion is fine. I will not argue about that. I read the OP again and he asked if his obligation was fulfilled. We agree that it is?

Not according to canon law, no. But ask some priests and you may get a different (prudential) answer in regards to whether it’s conducive to the spirit of the Sunday obligation. Why should I accept your opinion over the opinion of my very holy and very orthodox priest?

You do not have to accept my opinion. When referring specfically to the narrow question of whether the poster is fulfilling his obligation to attend mass on Sunday by assisting at the vigil mass is not my opinion but the answer is known from Church documents which have been provided here. It is fulfilled.

The other points you keep trying to bring up are matters of prudence.

 

[Sherlock]

fix:

An opinion is fine. I will not argue about that. I read the OP again and he asked if his obligation was fulfilled. We agree that it is?.

If you’d read my responses, you should have been able to figure out pretty darn soon that I was not disputing the “legality” of the OP’s actions. Has it really taken you this long to figure that out?

fix:

You do not have to accept my opinion. When referring specfically to the narrow question of whether the poster is fulfilling his obligation to attend mass on Sunday by assisting at the vigil mass is not my opinion but the answer is known from Church documents which have been provided here. It is fulfilled…

Hello! Hello! Is anyone out there?
Why are you repeating, as if it were necessary, something I acknowledged very promptly and never disputed? Here’s what I said when first addressing the legality of it many moons ago: “Vigil Masses are fine, and they fulfill the obligation”. Why are you continuing to point out something that I’ve never disputed?

fix:

The other points you keep trying to bring up are matters of prudence.

Yes! Thank you! Amazing: you’ve finally figured that out after just a few days…

 

[fix]

Sherlock:

If you’d read my responses, you should have been able to figure out pretty darn soon that I was not disputing the “legality” of the OP’s actions. Has it really taken you this long to figure that out?..

From post #30:

Della, I’m with you on this one. Attitude is important. I can understand preferring a Saturday Mass if it’s more quiet and reverent and conducive to praising God, but the attitude of “I just want to sleep in” is not a healthy sign, indicating a minimalist approach to one’s faith. I don’t see it as a good enough reason, regardless of the legality of it fulfilling the Sunday obligation…

Perhaps it is the way you have been wording your position that perplexes me? The OP wanted to know if his obligation is met? You admit it is met, then go on to claim his reason is not good enough because your opinion is that following the Church precepts are legalistic and one needs to do more than simply follow the precepts? Do I have it correct?

Using that logic may I conclude that going to the earliest possible mass on Sunday is the best way to become more holy? The later one goes, the longer one sleeps, the less holy one becomes? I usually go to the 7:30 am mass so I must be more holy?

 

[Sherlock]

How brilliant of you! The very post of mine that you quote supports what I’ve been saying all along: that despite the Sunday obligation being fulfilled in the legal sense, it’s my opinion that the attitude is not in the spirit of keeping the Holy Day holy. Thank you so much. Maybe if you’d just read that a few times and let it sink in, you could have spared yourself from typing the bloody obvious.

fix:

Perhaps it is the way you have been wording your position that perplexes me? The OP wanted to know if his obligation is met? You admit it is met, then go on to claim his reason is not good enough because your opinion is that following the Church precepts are legalistic and one needs to do more than simply follow the precepts? Do I have it correct??

Ver-r-ry good! Yup, that’s my opinion. I’m so-o-o-o glad that you’ve managed to scope that one out. You get a gold star. And your choice of the word “admit”, as if it’s a point I was unwilling to cede—how curious (I may have some reservations about daylight Masses being considered “vigil”, but legality is not determined by me). What’s your real beef, eh?

fix:

Using that logic may I conclude that going to the earliest possible mass on Sunday is the best way to become more holy? The later one goes, the longer one sleeps, the less holy one becomes? I usually go to the 7:30 am mass so I must be more holy?

That’s not the reasoning behind my logic, and does not, in fact, represent my logic. If that’s what you conclude from what I’ve written, then your lack of comprehension is not going to be fixed in the space of hundreds, nay, thousands, of posts. I’m not interested in practicing remedial education. Frankly, I give up: if it’s taken you this long to figure out what I am and am not saying, then I don’t think that fruitful conversation is possible.

 

[Cleo_K]

wow… I came here to find the answer to the question

if the ONLY mass we have is Saturday Vigil Mass… when is our “sabbath”… Saturday or Sunday…

and I see a bunch of nasty judgemental posts. If one goes to 12:30 pm mass instead of 6 a.m. mass on Sunday because it’s convienant… is that wrong too?

tsk tsk.

 

[Cleo_K]

wow… I came here to find the answer to the question

**if the ONLY mass we have is Saturday Vigil Mass… when is our “sabbath”… Saturday or Sunday… **

and I see a bunch of nasty judgemental posts. If one goes to 12:30 pm mass instead of 6 a.m. mass on Sunday because it’s more convenient… is that wrong too? If it is… then I am in the wrong religion for sure.

tsk tsk.

I honestly feel that God looks in on one of His on his or her knees during mass on Saturday evenings… then again sleeping peacefully on Sunday morning and smiles.

 

[maryjk]

Cleo_K,

Generally, when a thread has died, we leave it dead.

This thread is 3 years old. Everyone has moved on.

Please if you have a question, start a new thread. Its really better for everyone.

 

[Cleo_K]

How sweet maryjk, although an answer would have been kinder I guess every board needs its stuffy hall monitor types though.

Thing is… everyone obviously hasn’t “moved on”… the thread is open… findable via web search and a comment made late… is as valid as any other comment and the question remains unanswered 'cause apparently it was much more important and hmm… loving? to make a snotty comment

 

[maryjk]

How sweet maryjk, although an answer would have been kinder I guess every board needs its stuffy hall monitor types though.

Thing is… everyone obviously hasn’t “moved on”… the thread is open… findable via web search and a comment made late… is as valid as any other comment and the question remains unanswered 'cause apparently it was much more important and hmm… loving? to make a snotty comment

So I am a stuffy hall monitor with a snotty comment. In reality, I was trying to be sweet, and let you know that you might not receive many responses because this is an old thread.

Yes, people have moved on from this thread, since the post before yours was from 2 years ago. A thread will stay open until the site closes or if someone breaks forum rules within the thread.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=6487

Your cooperation and courtesy in not reopening old/dormant threads is requested:

-1. the issues that spurred them are often no longer “hot” or current topics, explaining why thread activity ceased originally

-2. posters originally involved in the discussion are sometimes no longer active on the forum and, therefore, unavailable to reply to comments added to the thread

Our experience suggests that, when a topic merits revival, it is best accomplished by initiating a new thread that draws on recent events and can be posted to contemporaneously. This eliminates the baggage of folks being frustrated by asking and not receiving responses to issues raised in early posts (because the new poster didn’t notice that the post he is quoting was made a year ago).

So, as our Forum Mod has said, maybe starting a new thread with the same topic would be a good idea.

 

[Cleo_K]

LOL

you proved my point kiddo - I love it that you whine about a thread being reopened by posting the thread you are whining about my posting to