Sunday - day of obligation

[Burt_Macklin]

We are bound to fulfill the obligation. We can fulfill the obligation by attending a Mass on the preceding evening. Why on earth would we not feel obliged to observe the holy day by attending Mass?

Well, tbh I do feel obliged to fulfill Sunday obligation on Saturday. But the question was not about how I feel but simply whether or not canon law creates an obligation. We are told how we are to compute time in Can. 202 §1, “a day is understood as a period consisting of 24 continuous hours and begins at midnight unless other provision is expressly made.” A reading of C. 1248 shows that it does make any express provision to extend the meaning of a “day”. So the obligation is only binding on Sunday. Besides that I believe that creating two obligation, one for Saturday and one for Sunday, would mean that we would have to attend to separate masses to fulfill them both.

I feel like we’re having a discussion about flair

https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/...xv-Kn3yeMQgcGvyPaooiEtO280OTPXHC_tr89oPb9DnDf

You know, if you want me to -]wear 37 pieces of flair/-] attend mass on Saturday, why don’t you change the minimum?

I feel people are expressing how they feel about doing the bare minimum and not addressing the actual meaning of C. 1248

 

[MatthewTrainor]

I feel like we’re having a discussion about flair

You know, if you want me to -]wear 37 pieces of flair/-] attend mass on Saturday, why don’t you change the minimum?

I feel people are expressing how they feel about doing the bare minimum and not addressing the actual meaning of C. 1248

This isn’t about flair it’s about showing up at all. It’s as if the boss said “All employees must work one Sunday shift every week or they will be automatically terminated. Working any shift on Saturday after 4pm will satisfy this requirement.” Minimum is only one shift. Is that flair?

 

[Burt_Macklin]

This isn’t about flair it’s about showing up at all. It’s as if the boss said “All employees must work one Sunday shift every week or they will be automatically terminated. Working any shift on Saturday after 4pm will satisfy this requirement.” Minimum is only one shift. Is that flair?

If that’s what the employee manual said I would feel the exact same way I do now minus the Catholic guilt. If I had a valid excuse to not work on Sunday I wouldn’t even think about working on Saturday.

 

[MatthewTrainor]

If that’s what the employee manual said I would feel the exact same way I do now minus the Catholic guilt. If I had a valid excuse to not work on Sunday I wouldn’t even think about working on Saturday.

And you’d be fired automatically.

 

[Burt_Macklin]

And you’d be fired automatically.

Burt uses, “summon union rep.” It’s super effective.

 

[MatthewTrainor]

Burt uses, “summon union rep.” It’s super effective.

Union rep explains that the term “Sunday shift” as clearly outlined in the quoted provision of the employee manual means any shift from Saturday 4pm through closing time on Sunday. He says that since your legit excuse doesn’t cover the entire time period graciously provided by the employer that you have no chance of winning the appeal. He advises you to promptly collect any personal property left on the premises as it is also company policy to summarily dispose of the same within 48 hours of termination.

See we can nitpick this point forever. I have not seen any interpretation by a Canon lawyer that says words to the effect “If you have a serious reason preventing you from attending Mass on Sunday, it is perfectly fine to skip the Saturday evening Mass if you’d rather just watch TV.” If you know of one, I would love to read it. The main question is how will the Lord interpret this obligation imposed by His Church that He granted the power to bind and to loose?

 

[Vico]

Well, tbh I do feel obliged to fulfill Sunday obligation on Saturday. But the question was not about how I feel but simply whether or not canon law creates an obligation. We are told how we are to compute time in Can. 202 §1, “a day is understood as a period consisting of 24 continuous hours and begins at midnight unless other provision is expressly made.” A reading of C. 1248 shows that it does make any express provision to extend the meaning of a “day”. So the obligation is only binding on Sunday. Besides that I believe that creating two obligation, one for Saturday and one for Sunday, would mean that we would have to attend to separate masses to fulfill them both.

I feel like we’re having a discussion about flair

https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/...xv-Kn3yeMQgcGvyPaooiEtO280OTPXHC_tr89oPb9DnDf

You know, if you want me to -]wear 37 pieces of flair/-] attend mass on Saturday, why don’t you change the minimum?

I feel people are expressing how they feel about doing the bare minimum and not addressing the actual meaning of C. 1248

The obligation created is for the holy day of obligation (Mass and hindering work and affairs). If it is foreseen that one will be unable to fulfill this obligation for a holy day on that day, such as happens with work or travel, then the previous evening is available as time for fulfillment. For the obligation to abstain from hindering work and affairs, is only on the day itself. See: New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, (John P. Beal, James A. Coriden, Thomas Joseph Green), p.1445.

Interesting situation occurs where the Immaculate Conception is obligatory and falls on Saturday. Which means Saturday and Sunday Mass obligations, which could be fulfilled any of these four ways:

• Sat, Sun.
• Fri (eve), Sun.
• Sat, Sat (eve).
• Fri (eve), Sat (eve).

 

[ProVobis]

This is getting a little juridical, wouldn’t you say? What on earth difference does it make?

Probably none in the long run. I suppose after missing Mass on one or two weekends when you could have very well attended, one tends not to think too much any more about it after that.

 

[skippykerrie]

Just to add to this query - we are travelling at the moment to go to a ‘Rosary Rally’ tomorrow.

There will be mass at the rally at 3pm tomorrow (Sunday). This will be the one mass we attend tomorrow.

For some reason, someone said this wouldn’t fulfil the obligation as it isn’t a ‘proper Sunday mass’? This really confused me!

I’m sure Mass is Mass and as long as we’re attending Mass on a Sunday, this meets the obligation?

 

[Vico]

Just to add to this query - we are travelling at the moment to go to a ‘Rosary Rally’ tomorrow.

There will be mass at the rally at 3pm tomorrow (Sunday). This will be the one mass we attend tomorrow.

For some reason, someone said this wouldn’t fulfil the obligation as it isn’t a ‘proper Sunday mass’? This really confused me!

I’m sure Mass is Mass and as long as we’re attending Mass on a Sunday, this meets the obligation?

The readings do not have to be those of Sunday. The purpose of the 1983 Canon law changes was to make it easier to fulfill the obligation.

There are 2:30PM Saturday Masses published as fulfilling the Sunday Mass obligation at these two churches:

• Guardian Angels Cathedral in Las Vegas, NV
• Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception in Kansas City, MO

 

[EasterJoy]

Probably none in the long run. I suppose after missing Mass on one or two weekends when you could have very well attended, one tends not to think too much any more about it after that.

Confess, be absolved, do your penance and amend. That is all that is needed.

 

[EasterJoy]

Well, tbh I do feel obliged to fulfill Sunday obligation on Saturday. But the question was not about how I feel but simply whether or not canon law creates an obligation. We are told how we are to compute time in Can. 202 §1, “a day is understood as a period consisting of 24 continuous hours and begins at midnight unless other provision is expressly made.” A reading of C. 1248 shows that it does make any express provision to extend the meaning of a “day”. So the obligation is only binding on Sunday. Besides that I believe that creating two obligation, one for Saturday and one for Sunday, would mean that we would have to attend to separate masses to fulfill them both.

This was the verse I have found cited: “Make no mistake: God is not mocked, for a person will reap only what he sows, because the one who sows for his flesh will reap corruption from the flesh, but the one who sows for the spirit will reap eternal life from the spirit. Let us not grow tired of doing good, for in due time we shall reap our harvest, if we do not give up.” Gal 6:7-9

Imagine you have died and face your judgment day. Are you really going to try to defend the choice to be excused from an obligation to attend Mass on the grounds that even though you could have attended a Mass on the preceding evening, you didn’t choose to do it because you had reasoned there was no obligation unless the obligation could be met *without *resorting to the vigil option? “Yes, Lord, your table was set and I could have come, but I excused myself from your feast because my legal mind gave me a way out of my duty to come.”

I’m not buying that.

 

[otjm]

Just to add to this query - we are travelling at the moment to go to a ‘Rosary Rally’ tomorrow.

There will be mass at the rally at 3pm tomorrow (Sunday). This will be the one mass we attend tomorrow.

For some reason, someone said this wouldn’t fulfil the obligation as it isn’t a ‘proper Sunday mass’? This really confused me!

I’m sure Mass is Mass and as long as we’re attending Mass on a Sunday, this meets the obligation?

Next time ask for a citation.

They are simply wrong; as are all too many “helpful” opinions.

 

[EasterJoy]

As my work schedule will NOT allow me to go to a Sunday morning Mass, I go on Saturday evenings. I am fulfilling my obligation to attend Mass. I am sure I am not the only Catholic out there whose job requires them to work on the weekend in some way. When I was growing up, my mother preferred the Saturday evening Mass and so I went at that time with her (and she still does to this day).

I am lucky enough to be able to find Masses within 30 minutes of my home that start on Sunday at 7:30 am through until a noon start and then start up again at about 4 pm all the way through to a start at 7 pm Sunday night. On Saturday night, likewise, there are a range of options. Catholics who do not live in the middle of such a high concentration of parishes as I do would not have that option. The “ability” to go to Mass depends very much on variables such as that.

 

[HelenRose]

The Lord’s Day of obligation begins at sundown Saturday evening. Saturday evening Mass IS the same as Sunday morning Mass.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

The Lord’s Day of obligation begins at sundown Saturday evening. Saturday evening Mass IS the same as Sunday morning Mass.

How do you know that?

 

[Vico]

The Lord’s Day of obligation begins at sundown Saturday evening. Saturday evening Mass IS the same as Sunday morning Mass.

It is not always the Sunday readings that are used on Saturday evening however.[R6] 1. Query: May the Mass of the vigil of Christmas be celebrated in the morning on 24 December? Reply: No. The Mass is the Mass of the weekday. The idea of a vigil has been completely altered; vigils in the former way of observance no longer exist. Now in the evening of the day preceding certain solemnities the vigil’s proper Mass is celebrated as already part of the solemnity; thus it is a festive Mass: Notitiae 5 (1969) 405, no. 21.

romcal.net/norms.html

 

[HelenRose]

It is not always the Sunday readings that are used on Saturday evening however.[R6] 1. Query: May the Mass of the vigil of Christmas be celebrated in the morning on 24 December? Reply: No. The Mass is the Mass of the weekday. The idea of a vigil has been completely altered; vigils in the former way of observance no longer exist. Now in the evening of the day preceding certain solemnities the vigil’s proper Mass is celebrated as already part of the solemnity; thus it is a festive Mass: Notitiae 5 (1969) 405, no. 21.

romcal.net/norms.html

Right, I see what you mean. Like the readings are different throughout the day on Christmas. My statement however, is intended to point out, that Saturday evening Mass is not somehow inferior to Sunday Mass. They both fulfil the Lord’s Day obligation.

 

[MissRose73]

I have gone to Eastern Catholic Divine Liturgy and the Extraordinary Form Masses on the same days a few times, and the readings for Sundays are different in those forms compared to the ordinary form. I still fulfilled my obligation with the first Mass of Sunday I attended regardless if it was EC, OF, or EF.

 

[dans0622]

Giving more than the calendar day of Sunday to fulfill the obligation is meaningless if that broader window does not establish the boundaries of the obligation itself. Since we are never bound to the impossible, those who legitimately can’t attend on Sunday would, under dans0622 and Agt. Macklin’s laxist interpretation, not need any more “opportunity to fulfill the obligation” because their physical or moral impediments to attendance would mean they have no obligation to fulfill. You can’t help people fulfill an obligation that does not exist.

…

Hello,

I think I will keep this comment in mind if I am ever said to be a rigorist…“on the contrary, I have been called laxist.”

The text of the law says we are obliged to participate in Mass and refrain from certain labor on Sunday. No one (in authority) has ever said the obligation to rest from servile labor begins on Saturday. That suggestion was considered by the drafter’s of the canon and rejected. Likewise, I know of no one (in authority) who has said the obligation to participate in Mass actually begins on Saturday.

Looking at the text of the initial “indult” which granted the possibility to fulfill the Mass obligation on Saturday, we read:

Among the considerations which have prompted this concession…are: the enormous and ever increasing frequency of weekend trips and of skiing excursions for whose patronizers the schedules of departure and return make it at least difficult to fulfill the Sunday precept; (some places get lots of snow, so) part of the inhabitants would not be able to get to church and can at present have contact with the priest on Saturday; (lack of clergy which may mean a priest would have to celebrate too many Masses on Sunday).

It wasn’t necessarily a question of “impossibility.” That first indult was followed by a clarification of sorts, a few days later, which said:

no change has occurred in the general character of the Church’s discipline relative to the Sunday precept and, therefore, Sunday is the day consecrated to our Lord…; in order to always make easier the fulfillment of the obligation to hear holy Mass and to eliminate its regrettable non-fulfillment and at the same time for the lamentable lack of clergy, the faculty of satisfying the Sunday precept by a Mass heard at Vespers on Saturday has been granted…(in special and other exceptional circumstances). … The discipline of the Church, which since apostolic times has considered Sunday as “the Lord’s day,” remains unchanged.

Other indults followed, and tended to include language about making sure that the faithful be reminded that Sunday is the day consecrated/dedicated to the Lord.

Quotations taken from Canon Law Digest, v. 6, pp. 671, 671-672.

Dan