Second Sunday of Advent and Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception

[benedictgal]

I was visting the new administrator of our Cathedral today to go over some documents. He received an interesting fax from the bishop (actually, all of the priests did).

Our local ordinary affirmed the fact that December 8th is a Holy Day of Obligation in the United States. However, in his memo, he noted that he consulted with the Bishops Committee on Divine Worship regarding the Sunday evening Mass. Bearing in mind that we are still in Sunday, the BCW granted permission for parishes to use the readings for the Vigil of the Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception.

Both of us were somewhat perplexed about this. Would it be seen as a way for people to kill two birds with one stone, so to speak, in that they could simultaneously satisfy both their Sunday and Holy Day obligation?

I am going to ask my PV about this tomorrow. Something just doesn’t sit right. I can understand substituting the feast where this Sunday to have fallen during ordinal time, but, if the Church moves the feast to a Monday when December 8th falls on a Sunday, shouldn’t the same principle apply?

Please do not think that I am being inflexible, but this is somewhat confusing. I can understand the citations from Canon Law regarding the readings, but, I thought that Advent and Lenten Sundays outranked solemnities. I know that some years back, even the USCCB had declared that if the Feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe fell on an Advent Sunday, the feast would be celebrated either December 11th or December 13th, but, not on the 12. Granted, the Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception is our patronal feast, I am still somewhat perplexed.

 

[FrDavid96]

I was visting the new administrator of our Cathedral today to go over some documents. He received an interesting fax from the bishop (actually, all of the priests did).

Our local ordinary affirmed the fact that December 8th is a Holy Day of Obligation in the United States. However, in his memo, he noted that he consulted with the Bishops Committee on Divine Worship regarding the Sunday evening Mass. Bearing in mind that we are still in Sunday, the BCW granted permission for parishes to use the readings for the Vigil of the Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception.

Both of us were somewhat perplexed about this. Would it be seen as a way for people to kill two birds with one stone, so to speak, in that they could simultaneously satisfy both their Sunday and Holy Day obligation?

I am going to ask my PV about this tomorrow. Something just doesn’t sit right. I can understand substituting the feast where this Sunday to have fallen during ordinal time, but, if the Church moves the feast to a Monday when December 8th falls on a Sunday, shouldn’t the same principle apply?

Please do not think that I am being inflexible, but this is somewhat confusing. I can understand the citations from Canon Law regarding the readings, but, I thought that Advent and Lenten Sundays outranked solemnities. I know that some years back, even the USCCB had declared that if the Feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe fell on an Advent Sunday, the feast would be celebrated either December 11th or December 13th, but, not on the 12. Granted, the Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception is our patronal feast, I am still somewhat perplexed.

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.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

I was visting the new administrator of our Cathedral today to go over some documents. He received an interesting fax from the bishop (actually, all of the priests did).

Our local ordinary affirmed the fact that December 8th is a Holy Day of Obligation in the United States. However, in his memo, he noted that he consulted with the Bishops Committee on Divine Worship regarding the Sunday evening Mass. Bearing in mind that we are still in Sunday, the BCW granted permission for parishes to use the readings for the Vigil of the Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception.

Both of us were somewhat perplexed about this. Would it be seen as a way for people to kill two birds with one stone, so to speak, in that they could simultaneously satisfy both their Sunday and Holy Day obligation?

I am going to ask my PV about this tomorrow. Something just doesn’t sit right. I can understand substituting the feast where this Sunday to have fallen during ordinal time, but, if the Church moves the feast to a Monday when December 8th falls on a Sunday, shouldn’t the same principle apply?

Please do not think that I am being inflexible, but this is somewhat confusing. I can understand the citations from Canon Law regarding the readings, but, I thought that Advent and Lenten Sundays outranked solemnities. I know that some years back, even the USCCB had declared that if the Feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe fell on an Advent Sunday, the feast would be celebrated either December 11th or December 13th, but, not on the 12. Granted, the Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception is our patronal feast, I am still somewhat perplexed.

No it is not possible to fulfill both obligations at one Mass. The Feast of the Immaculate Conception is never moved or abrogated. It is always a Holy Day of Obligation.

There can be two Masses on Sunday evening. One for Sunday at say 5:30 PM using the Sunday readings and one at 7:00 PM for the Innaculate Conception using the proper readings for the vigil.

 

[tee_eff_em]

The Feast of the Immaculate Conception is never moved or abrogated. It is always a Holy Day of Obligation.

The Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception *is *moveable. When 8-Dec falls on a Sunday, which is necessarily the 2nd Sunday of Advent, Immaculate Conception is moved to Monday 9-Dec. The last time this happened (2002), the obligation to assist at Mass was *not *attached.

We shall have to wait and see what happens in 2013…

tee
I didn’t like it either, but the USCCB didn’t ask me :ehh:

 

[puzzleannie]

there is still no problem with the Sunday evening Mass, no matter which readings are used, people will still have to attend 2 Masses that weekend.

most of them won’t anyhow, so why the flap?

by the reprehensible practice of shifting holy days around like a deck of cards the bishops have pretty well convinced people they are not important or at best whims, so the sense of obligation has all but disappeared.

the same thing happens when Sunday falls on Christmas Eve or on Dec. 26

 

[IrishAm]

Both of us were somewhat perplexed about this. Would it be seen as a way for people to kill two birds with one stone, so to speak, in that they could simultaneously satisfy both their Sunday and Holy Day obligation?

Our pastor specifically noted last weekend that the Sunday evening mass at our parish would fulfill the Sunday obligation only, it would not be a vigil for the Holy Day on Monday. His exact words, in fact, were “this is not a two-fer”.

 

[tee_eff_em]

Please do not think that I am being inflexible, but this is somewhat confusing. I can understand the citations from Canon Law regarding the readings, but, I thought that Advent and Lenten Sundays outranked solemnities.

What are the citations from Canon Law regarding the readings?

The Table of Liturgical Days may be found at that link.

tee

 

[tee_eff_em]

Ed Peters has an interesting recent blog post, with pointers to Fr Edward McNamara, regarding the Time period for fulfilling the “Sunday obligation”. I am not sure either addresses this issue particularly however.

I Am Not A Canon Lawyer, but my understanding is

• 
  *]One fulfills the Sunday obligation in this case any time from Saturday evening until midnight between Sunday and Monday
  *]One fulfills the IC obligation in this case any time from Sunday evening until midnight between Monday and Tuesday
  *]There is no “two-fer”
  
  NB (IMHO) one could fulfill both obligations on Sunday evening, if there are appropriately timed Masses, regardless of the readings and Mass setting, et cetera. They could both use the Sunday readings, or both use the IC readings, or one of each (are there any other possibilities?), but as long as they are two Masses, two obligations may be satisfied.
  
  :twocents:
  tee

 

[MusicMan]

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.

In any case, if the people with the authority to grant permission for a Vigil on Sunday night have granted permission, then it’s the pastor’s responsibility to explain that there will be no “two-fer” on Sunday night, and then the faithful’s responsibility to carry out their obligations.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Ed Peters has an interesting recent blog post, with pointers to Fr Edward McNamara, regarding the Time period for fulfilling the “Sunday obligation”. I am not sure either addresses this issue particularly however.

I Am Not A Canon Lawyer, but my understanding is

• 
  *]One fulfills the Sunday obligation in this case any time from Saturday evening until midnight between Sunday and Monday
  *]One fulfills the IC obligation in this case any time from Sunday evening until midnight between Monday and Tuesday
  *]There is no “two-fer”
  NB (IMHO) one could fulfill both obligations on Sunday evening, if there are appropriately timed Masses, regardless of the readings and Mass setting, et cetera. They could both use the Sunday readings, or both use the IC readings, or one of each (are there any other possibilities?), but as long as they are two Masses, two obligations may be satisfied.
  
  :twocents:
  tee

• 
  The time noted after “noon” does not apply in the U.S. The USCCB has established after 4 pm.

 

[dans0622]

I am not yet a canon lawyer so I certainly don`t know everything about this. My opinion, though, is that a person can fulfill two obligations with one action. For example, we are required to receive communion at least once a year. We are also required to attend Mass every Sunday. We can do both with one action. Or, members of religious communities are often (maybe always) required to make a retreat each year. Those who are being ordained are also required to make a retreat before ordination. A religious man who is nearing ordination could make one retreat, at a proper time before ordination, and fulfill both obligations.

Here, the relevant canon says: 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.

So, as tee_eff_em said earlier, refering to Dr. Peters, we can fulfill our Sunday obligation from evening Saturday to midnight Sunday at a Mass. We fulfill the obligation for the Immaculate Conception at any time from Sunday evening to Monday midnight at a Mass.

It would certainly be best if everyone went to Mass on both calendar days but I don`t think it is required by the law which, in this case, operates in liturgical days. I would be happy if someone would correct me if I am wrong.

Dan

 

[tee_eff_em]

The time noted after “noon” does not apply in the U.S. The USCCB has established after 4 pm.

Does the USCCB regulate the time on the evening of the preceding day prior to which one may not fulfill his obligation?

Or does it regulate the time on the evening of the preceding day prior to which one may not offer an anticipated or vigil Mass?

tee

 

[MusicMan]

You are arguing that because one can fulfill two different obligations with one action, then one can also fulfill two of the same obligations with one action. That’s the ol’ “apples and oranges” fallacy.

 

[FrDavid96]

Does the USCCB regulate the time on the evening of the preceding day prior to which one may not fulfill his obligation?

Or does it regulate the time on the evening of the preceding day prior to which one may not offer an anticipated or vigil Mass?

tee

Tee,
The two are one-and-the-same. The priest’s obligation to offer the Mass at the proper time is the same as the faithful’s obligation to attend that Mass at the proper time. There are not two different standards of time, one for the priest and one for the congregation.

 

[tee_eff_em]

I am not yet a canon lawyer so I certainly don`t know everything about this. My opinion, though, is that a person can fulfill two obligations with one action. For example, we are required to receive communion at least once a year. We are also required to attend Mass every Sunday. We can do both with one action. Or, members of religious communities are often (maybe always) required to make a retreat each year. Those who are being ordained are also required to make a retreat before ordination. A religious man who is nearing ordination could make one retreat, at a proper time before ordination, and fulfill both obligations.

I Am Still Not A Canon Lawyer, but to clarify: I do not say, in general, that a person cannot fulfill two obligations with one action. I just do not believe it can be done in a case such as being discussed here.

Aside:
Admittedly, I have wavered on this point (cf. a number of threads from December 2006), but this is my current feeling. I am open to be persuaded otherwise, I suppose.

A particularly sticky question, it seems to me, is this: Suppose between Fri 5-Dec and Tue 9-Dec I attend precisely one Mass, at 7:45pm Sunday. Which sin will I have need to confess: That I failed to keep the Sunday obligation? Or that I failed to keep the Holy Day obligation?

tee

 

[tee_eff_em]

Tee,
The two are one-and-the-same. The priest’s obligation to offer

the Mass

at the proper time is the same as the faithful’s obligation to attend

that Mass

at the proper time.

Respectfully, Fr, I think we are talking of two different things. I do not ask about the faithful being able to attend “that Mass”, I am asking about the faithful being able to attend “a Mass celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite”.

tee

 

[FrDavid96]

Respectfully, Fr, I think we are talking of two different things. I do not ask about the faithful being able to attend “that Mass”, I am asking about the faithful being able to attend “a Mass celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite”.

tee

OK. I misunderstood the question. I thought you were asking “can a priest have Mass at 3 PM on Saturday, but the faithful have to attend a Mass at or after 4 PM?”

A Catholic fulfills the obligation by attending ANY Mass within the prescribed time period. That’s what the canon (which you quoted) says. Nothing more can be added to that. No one else may add a condition to the law which the law itself does not place there. As a future canonist, you’ll understand what is meant by the axiom “we cannot place additional burdens on people.”

“A Mass” means “A Mass” it does not mean “A Mass, but not in the case of…” nor does it mean “A Mass so long as…”

The only condition that may be added is to say that the Mass must be valid, but that’s not an aditional requirement, it’s simply to understand the plain meaning of the words that the Church would not equate an invalid Mass with a valid one. I bring that up only because one would not fulfill the obligation by attending a service conducted by one who is not a validly ordained priest.

Having said that though, a Catholic still has two obligations in that (roughly) 32 hour time period, so there’s it’s not possible to attend 1 Mass and have it count for 2 Masses.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

I am not yet a canon lawyer so I certainly don`t know everything about this. My opinion, though, is that a person can fulfill two obligations with one action. For example, we are required to receive communion at least once a year. We are also required to attend Mass every Sunday. We can do both with one action. Or, members of religious communities are often (maybe always) required to make a retreat each year. Those who are being ordained are also required to make a retreat before ordination. A religious man who is nearing ordination could make one retreat, at a proper time before ordination, and fulfill both obligations.

Here, the relevant canon says: 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.

So, as tee_eff_em said earlier, refering to Dr. Peters, we can fulfill our Sunday obligation from evening Saturday to midnight Sunday at a Mass. We fulfill the obligation for the Immaculate Conception at any time from Sunday evening to Monday midnight at a Mass.

It would certainly be best if everyone went to Mass on both calendar days but I don`t think it is required by the law which, in this case, operates in liturgical days. I would be happy if someone would correct me if I am wrong.

Dan

Your incorrect.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Respectfully, Fr, I think we are talking of two different things. I do not ask about the faithful being able to attend “that Mass”, I am asking about the faithful being able to attend “a Mass celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite”.

tee

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.

 

[dans0622]

You are arguing that because one can fulfill two different obligations with one action, then one can also fulfill two of the same obligations with one action. That’s the ol’ “apples and oranges” fallacy.

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.