Second Sunday of Advent and Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception

[FrDavid96]

I guess you are talking to me, MusicMan. Can you explain your point a little more? Do you agree that a person can filfill two different (as you say) obligations with one action? And, how is the obligation to make certain retreats, which can be fulfilled by one act, different from the obligation to participate in Masses on certain days, which (I am thinking) can also be fulfilled by one act?

Thanks.

Anyway, from my limited research, I am finding that my opinion is in the minority, among those who know better (like Dr. Peters and Jimmy Akin). But, their arguments are not very convincing…see here, for example: jimmyakin.typepad.com/defensor_fidei/2006/12/a_christmas_two/comments/page/2/

I would like to find the statements of these learned persons…

Dan

P.S. Thanks for the reply Br. Rich. Please tell me why.

Dan,

Here’s the difference. The obligation to attend Mass on a Sunday is a divine command (and I suppose to a certain degree, so is the obligation for a holy day although in a less direct way because holy days are established by the Church while the Sabbath is established directly by God).

The obligation to attend two retreats is a matter of discipline. The authority which requires you to attend two retreats may likewise attach a stipulation to that requirement that attending one retreat can fulfill both obligations. On the other hand, if both of the authorities which require you to make a retreat were to say “this must be distinct from any other retreat” then you would still have the obligation under obedience to make two distinct retreats.

 

[tee_eff_em]

I think the bigger worry is over whether or not you pray Evening Prayer II for the Second Sunday or Evening Prayer I for Immaculate Conception.

My diocese Department for Worship says:

The Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception begins with Evening Prayer I on Sunday, December 7

, and concludes with the celebration of Evening Prayer II of the Solemnity on December 8th. However, in light of the fact that Sunday evening Masses are a common occurrence in many parts of the United States, the Eucharist celebrated on the evening of Sunday, December 7th, may be either the Mass of the Sunday or of The Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception, provided that this is made clear to the faithful in advance.

Likewise the St Joseph Guide to CBP’s *Christian Prayer *indicates Evening Prayer I for Immaculate Conception on Sun 7-Dec.

tee

 

[Verbum_Caro]

I would have to go back and read the USCCB site again but I believe it states that a Vigil Mass cannot begin before 4PM. The Easter Vigil has it’s own rules which is Sundown local time.

Br. Rich,

I think perhaps (correct me if I am wrong please!) that you might be missing the issue that Tee (and I think Fr. David as well) are alluding to.

Whether or not it is *permissible *for a Parish to style their Saturday Mass as “ancticipated” or “vigil” for the following Sunday before 4PM is not the issue. The issue was, according to Canon law any mass offered the “evening” before satisfies the obligation. The question then becomes “what constitutes the evening before” canonically.

Ed Peters is pointing out that there is evidence that “evening” before means “after 12pm.” Even if a 2PM Mass using Sunday readings would be against the local rules, it would still be a mass in the evening, according to the argument, and fulfill the canonical obligation. (So would a 2PM Mass which used Saturday readings, and which wouldn’t be against the rules).

Thoughts?
VC

 

[Dicerning]

I think the bigger worry is over whether or not you pray Evening Prayer II for the Second Sunday or Evening Prayer I for Immaculate Conception.

.

Why would one pray EPI for I.C.?

SUndays and feasts of the lord are the only time EPI should be used. Ooops nevermind I guess Monday is a solemnity.

With that in mind I was always taught that SUndays Trumped Solemnities.

 

[tee_eff_em]

Why would one pray EPI for I.C.?

SUndays and feasts of the lord are the only time EPI should be used.

Solemnities also have an EPI
(And Feasts of the Lord only use EPI when they should fall on a Sunday)

tee

 

[FrDavid96]

Br. Rich,

I think perhaps (correct me if I am wrong please!) that you might be missing the issue that Tee (and I think Fr. David as well) are alluding to.

Whether or not it is *permissible *for a Parish to style their Saturday Mass as “ancticipated” or “vigil” for the following Sunday before 4PM is not the issue. The issue was, according to Canon law any mass offered the “evening” before satisfies the obligation. The question then becomes “what constitutes the evening before” canonically.

Ed Peters is pointing out that there is evidence that “evening” before means “after 12pm.” Even if a 2PM Mass using Sunday readings would be against the local rules, it would still be a mass in the evening, according to the argument, and fulfill the canonical obligation. (So would a 2PM Mass which used Saturday readings, and which wouldn’t be against the rules).

Thoughts?
VC

VC,

It’s up to the conference of bishops first, and then the local ordinary for his own diocese acting within those norms to establish what defines “evening.”

I haven’t read what Ed Peters wrote, but I hardly think that his opinion, no matter how well-grounded, would take precedence over the liturgical laws (yes, I know you would also agree, but you’re posting the information for the sake of discussion).

 

[Digitonomy]

I would have to go back and read the USCCB site again but I believe it states that a Vigil Mass cannot begin before 4PM.

I haven’t seen any statement by the USCCB on the matter, but I suspect they simply recognized the opinion of the Canon Law Society of America that “the evening before” began at 4pm." Contrast this with the Canon Law Society of Great Britain and Ireland, which determined that evening begins at noon.

The Congregation of the Blessed Sacrament had an excellent article in its Emmanuel Magazine a few years ago discussing this matter, and it made a good case based on previous rules and indults issued by the Vatican, that 4pm is what was meant in the 1983 code. Unfortunately, they seem to have pulled the article.

 

[tee_eff_em]

It’s up to the conference of bishops first, and then the local ordinary for his own diocese acting within those norms to establish what defines “evening.”

Is it? (As I repeatedly state, I Am Not A Canon Lawyer – Is there something in Canon Law that gives them this authority?)

tee

 

[malphono]

Br. Rich,

I think perhaps (correct me if I am wrong please!) that you might be missing the issue that Tee (and I think Fr. David as well) are alluding to.

Whether or not it is *permissible *for a Parish to style their Saturday Mass as “ancticipated” or “vigil” for the following Sunday before 4PM is not the issue. The issue was, according to Canon law any mass offered the “evening” before satisfies the obligation. The question then becomes “what constitutes the evening before” canonically.

Ed Peters is pointing out that there is evidence that “evening” before means “after 12pm.” Even if a 2PM Mass using Sunday readings would be against the local rules, it would still be a mass in the evening, according to the argument, and fulfill the canonical obligation. (So would a 2PM Mass which used Saturday readings, and which wouldn’t be against the rules).

Thoughts?
VC

My 2c is that I believe the hour of Vespers is the “dividing line” so to speak. From that, I will posit that Mass offered prior to the Vespers hour (which can vary from 4 to 6pm but usually (in the US anyway) is considered to be 5pm) is for the actual calendar day. If it is after the Vespers hour, it would be for the next calendar day. (That is, of course, unless there was an unusual situation which required that the Mass of the day be offered after the Vespers hour. Or, (which would seem to be more unusual) that a post-Vespers-hour Mass is normally offered in a particular place for a particular reason.)

Specific to the case at hand, we have a Sunday and then we have a Holy Day on Monday. The observance of the Holy Day has not been transferred, so there are two obligations to be met, irrespective of what readings are used.

 

[Verbum_Caro]

VC,

It’s up to the conference of bishops first, and then the local ordinary for his own diocese acting within those norms to establish what defines “evening.”

Fr., it brings up an interesting point. Have the USCCB or any local Bishops said what constitutes “evening” for the purposes of Canon law? Local ordinaries, following the guidance of the USCCB have certainly said “You can’t have a vigil mass or an anticipated mass before 4PM” but have they said when “evening” starts?

Think of it this way: what if you are in a Diocese or at a parish that doesn’t have a vigil or an anticipated Mass, and yet has a Mass a Saturday Mass as 5PM. Would that fulfill your Sunday obligation? Why? (Presumably because it fulfills Canon 1248)

So what if, same situation, but the Saturday Mass is at 3:00?

See what I am getting at?
VC

 

[tee_eff_em]

The Congregation of the Blessed Sacrament had an excellent article in its Emmanuel Magazine a few years ago discussing this matter, and it made a good case based on previous rules and indults issued by the Vatican, that 4pm is what was meant in the 1983 code. Unfortunately, they seem to have pulled the article.

For the curious, this article can be found in the Internet Archive.

tee

 

[benedictgal]

Here’s how I see it. Catholics must fulfill both obligations, and the only way to do that is to attend one Mass (from Sat. evening to Sunday night) for Sunday, and a second Mass (from Sun. evening to Mon. night). There is no way that attending only one Mass could fulfill both obligations.

I haven’t seen the memo (of couse not), but I doubt that it was intended to say or imply otherwise.

Could it be that since Sunday evening Masses are rare (don’t know, asking) that it was written under the assumption that a Sunday evening Mass would be something added to the usual parish schedule for the sake of Immaculate Conception?

In other words, I don’t think it’s meant to suppress the Sunday Mass, but rather to be added to the schedule.

As for your last paragraph, I agree with you, and that’s why the permission is necessary, but keep in mind that it’s not talking about replacing the Sunday morning Mass, but adding the evening Mass.

Anyway, shouldn’t be typing right now. Came to the desk for a quick look and I know that was terribly redundant and repetitive. Too lazy to edit it, but point made.

I do not have the original memo with me, although I will ask my PV if I can see it again. I read it twice when I was with the new Cathedral administrator, as we were both a little taken aback.

In my diocese, late afternoon/early evening Sunday Masses are quite prevelant. Even the university has an 8PM Sunday Mass.

What we did for Christmas (when we had the Dec. 24-Sunday situation was have the last 4th Sunday of Advent Mass celebrated at 1PM, but, then at 7PM, it was already Christmas Eve. But, Christmas outranks the other Solemnities during this time period, including the Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception.

Now, if we are going to, in fact, use the Vigil readings for the Sunday evening Mass, then, the lectors will have to be informed and the cantor will also have to take note to amend her selections.

It just creates more confusion.

 

[Verbum_Caro]

Thanks tee_ for hunting that article down for us. It was interesting.

VC

 

[Verbum_Caro]

Benedictgal,

Regarding your original post: the situation you describe does seem rather confusing.

What happens when people who normally go to a later Sunday Mass show up and the readings, etc. are for the Vigil of the Immaculate Conception? That would mean they would “miss out” (I know thats not a big concern, but you know what I mean) on the Sunday liturgy. And then, would they be tempted to not go to Mass on the following Monday? (Recall, they would need to go in order to fulfill both obligations since the Vigil Mass had to fulfill their Sunday obligation).

At the very least one would hope that the pastors would tell everyone at the the later Sunday Masses (IC vigil) that “folks, this doesn’t fulfill your obligation for the Immaculate Conception. and you all have to go tomorrow, even though it will be the same liturgy.”

What do you think?
VC

 

[AJV]

My diocese Department for Worship says:

Likewise the St Joseph Guide to CBP’s *Christian Prayer *indicates Evening Prayer I for Immaculate Conception on Sun 7-Dec.

tee

How is this correct? From my reading of the Table of Liturgical Days, the Sundays of Advent take precedence over the Immaculate Conception. Even if you take the Sunday II as being of the same rank, it would still take precedence since the rubric says says that Evening Prayer II of the current day should be celebrated

 

[tee_eff_em]

How is this correct? From my reading of the Table of Liturgical Days, the Sundays of Advent take precedence over the Immaculate Conception.

I know not the rationale I only reported what others have advised.

Even if you take the Sunday II as being of the same rank, it would still take precedence since the rubric says says that Evening Prayer II of the current day should be celebrated

I skimmed the GILOH, but didn’t find that rubric – Could you be more specific? Thanks.

tee

 

[FrDavid96]

VC and Tee,
It is within the competence of the local bishop as the pastor of the diocese and the final authority on liturgical matters to work within the norms established by the Church and the conference of bishops to regulate the Liturgy. I don’t know whether or not the USBBC has established a “time” for evening. I rather suspect NOT because the territory covers such a vast area that sunset happens at such varied times. In the complete absence of any national norms, the bishop’s decision would still prevail.

What I’m saying is that from the point of view of a parish, scheduling the vigil Mass must be done after consulting with the policy of the local ordinary, and in compliance with that. In other words, it’s not up to the pastor to determine what constitutes “evening” but the responsibility of the pastor to apply the decisions of the bishop–regardless of what the pastor might read from any other source, including even a very trustworthy source like the Canon Law Society (which indeed, would not try to usurp the authority of the local bishop in any case.) If the bishop determines, he likewise has the authority to delegate this decision to the pastor.

PS I do know for a fact that many bishops have established a set time for the earliest possible vigil Mass. In some cases, the bishops have decided to follow the policy of the archbishop. I can’t say, however, that every bishop has an established policy. If not, see the last sentence above.

 

[FrDavid96]

Fr., it brings up an interesting point. Have the USCCB or any local Bishops said what constitutes “evening” for the purposes of Canon law? Local ordinaries, following the guidance of the USCCB have certainly said “You can’t have a vigil mass or an anticipated mass before 4PM” but have they said when “evening” starts?

Think of it this way: what if you are in a Diocese or at a parish that doesn’t have a vigil or an anticipated Mass, and yet has a Mass a Saturday Mass as 5PM. Would that fulfill your Sunday obligation? Why? (Presumably because it fulfills Canon 1248)

So what if, same situation, but the Saturday Mass is at 3:00?

See what I am getting at?
VC

Yes, I see what you’re getting at. But the interpretation of the bishop prevails over the interpretation of the pastor or anyone else.

Situation 1: Yes. Because the time of the Mass is after that time (4) established by the bishop as being “evening”

Situation 2: No. Likewise, because it is before the time established by the bishop, and neither the pastor nor any individual person may overrule the bishop’s determination/interpretation.

When the bishop says “this is when evening begins” and “this is when you may have a vigil Mass” those 2 sentences mean the same thing, unless the bishop specifies otherwise (and while that’s possible, it is not very likely)

As an aside, I do recall a situation when the above happened. I believe that the Archdiocese of Philadelphia was one of the last in the US to permit vigil Masses. The Cardinal Archbishop certainly recognized that 9 PM on a Saturday was well past the time of “evening” yet he made the decision not to allow vigil Masses at that time.

 

[Verbum_Caro]

As an aside, I do recall a situation when the above happened. I believe that the Archdiocese of Philadelphia was one of the last in the US to permit vigil Masses. The Cardinal Archbishop certainly recognized that 9 PM on a Saturday was well past the time of “evening” yet he made the decision not to allow vigil Masses at that time.

Fr. David,

That is an excellent example for us to study. Say one did go to a Mass at 4:00 PM on Saturday back then. Did you fulfill your Sunday obligation? If so, why? The Archbishop didn’t permit Vigil or anticipated masses, and so also (in accord with your argument) didn’t specify when “evening” began.

So if it fulfilled the Sunday obligation, why? And if it did, would a 3:45 Mass have done so as well?

VC

 

[FrDavid96]

Fr. David,

That is an excellent example for us to study. Say one did go to a Mass at 4:00 PM on Saturday back then. Did you fulfill your Sunday obligation? If so, why? The Archbishop didn’t permit Vigil or anticipated masses, and so also (in accord with your argument) didn’t specify when “evening” began.

So if it fulfilled the Sunday obligation, why? And if it did, would a 3:45 Mass have done so as well?

VC

No, one did not fulfill the Sunday obligation because the bishop determined that the appropriate time had not yet arrived. He has the authority to establish that time.

This is not an example of placing an additional burden not required by the law, because the canon says that only that the time is “evening”. And the local bishop is competent to define what the canon means by “evening” In that case, I suppose we could say that the Cardinal Archbishop defined evening as “12 midnight.”