Sunday evening mass

[ConstantineTG]

At our parish Church in the past where there has been a Holy day of Obligation on two consecutive days (rarely happened), I have been to the evening Mass on the first Holy Day of Obligation and during the Homily the priest has specifically said that we get “2 for 1” and that the Mass we were attending covered our obligation for both days.
Now whether the priest was correct or not I don’t know but everyone took him at his word and accepted that.

Either he was right or he just dispensed a church full of Catholics of their obligation

 

[Petergee]

What you seem to be doing is trying to rationalize from the canons, and that really doesn’t work.

No, what you are trying to do is to maximise the obligation imposed by the Canons. And that definitely doesn’t work. Because one of the basic principles of Canon Law is that where there is apparent ambiguity as to an obligation, the more liberal interpretation is the one to be used.

 

[Petergee]

That regulation dealt with a slightly different issue, and it’s not clear whether it’s in force anyway in the modern form of the rite. At the cathedral in Las Vegas, for one, they have an anticipated Mass at 2:30 PM (as well as 4:00, 5:30, and five more times on Sunday).

No, 4 pm on Saturday is still generally the earliest time possible for a Vigil Mass. Las Vegas has a one-off dispensation to have a Mass at 2:30 pm because many of the Catholics there work in rotating round the clock shifts at the casinos and hotels and some of them can’t practicably attend Mass any other time. Similar to how in some Moslem majority countries where Sunday is a normal working day, Catholics are permitted to attend Mass on a Friday to satisfy their Sunday obligation if they can’t practicably attend Mass on Sunday.

 

[malphono]

No, what you are trying to do is to maximise the obligation imposed by the Canons.

No, not at all.

one of the basic principles of Canon Law is that where there is apparent ambiguity as to an obligation, the more liberal interpretation is the one to be used.

Yes, I know that principle very well, and in this case there is no ambiguity. Keep in mind that there is also a principle of equality in the law.

The law (in this case the “obligation”) applies equally to all, irrespective of the time on the clock. Let’s say, e.g., an untransferred Holy Day occurs on a Saturday. If those who choose to attend a Saturday evening Mass are given a “2-fer,” the latter principle would be clearly violated since those who attend Mass during the day on the Holy Day would be further “obliged” to attend Mass for the Sunday. (The same would, of course, apply if the untrasnferred Holy Day were to fall on a Monday.)

 

[laszlo]

I believe I had to add something.

The Masses are not just Masses, but those are the masses of a particular day.

The Christmas Mass on December 25th (or the previous evening) is for Christmas, with specific propers; also in this year the following Sunday is a specific mass for Sunday within the Octave of Nativity

This requires to attend the Mass of the Sunday or Holy days of obligation “to participate in the Mass.” (Can 1247) and not in any Mass

For this reason one mass cannot fulfill two obligations: either the obligation is abrogated, (like it is the case for occurrences or with the exception of Christmas for the Holy Days of obligations with fall on Saturday or Monday) or it not fulfilled by a Mass celebrated for an other day.

 

[Phemie]

I believe I had to add something.

The Masses are not just Masses, but those are the masses of a particular day.

The Christmas Mass on December 25th (or the previous evening) is for Christmas, with specific propers; also in this year the following Sunday is a specific mass for Sunday within the Octave of Nativity

This requires to attend the Mass of the Sunday or Holy days of obligation “to participate in the Mass.” (Can 1247) and not in any Mass

For this reason one mass cannot fulfill two obligations: either the obligation is abrogated, (like it is the case for occurrences or with the exception of Christmas for the Holy Days of obligations with fall on Saturday or Monday) or it not fulfilled by a Mass celebrated for an other day.

That’s not right.

If this year my parish celebrates a Mass of Christmas at 6 p.m. Christmas Day and I have already participated in any one of the 4 Masses of Christmas (Vigil, Midnight, Dawn or Day), my participation in that 6 p.m. Mass fulfills my obligation for Sunday regardless of the fact that the Mass being celebrated is not the Feast of the Holy Family.

 

[curlycool89]

Personally, I regularly attend Mass at Sunday 9pm at the College Chapel while at university. It’s the Mass most university student attend (literally standing room only, it’s a joy just to see). Although, I would still call my “regular” Mass time Sunday morning, I just go to the 9pm one because it’s the one me and all my peers go to.

That’s not right.

If this year my parish celebrates a Mass of Christmas at 6 p.m. Christmas Day and I have already participated in any one of the 4 Masses of Christmas (Vigil, Midnight, Dawn or Day), my participation in that 6 p.m. Mass fulfills my obligation for Sunday regardless of the fact that the Mass being celebrated is not the Feast of the Holy Family.

That I know is true. If you have a Holy Day of Obligation, you can fulfill it by attending a Mass or Divine Liturgy in any Rite or Form of the Catholic Church regardless of what they’re actually celebrating (OF, EF, Ukrainian DL).

I saw this in another thread, but here’s what the Canadian Bishop’s had to say about Christmas on Saturday/Monday:

When Christmas Is Celebrated on Saturday

It is important to keep the celebration of Christmas and Sunday distinct, and to be mindful of the extra demands which are placed upon priests and other liturgical ministers when Christmas and Sunday are celebrated on consecutive days.

The following recommendations will be helpful.

a) If possible, additional celebrations of the Vigil Mass of Christmas are to be avoided.

b) If necessary, only one anticipated Midnight Mass should be celebrated around 10:00 p.m.

c) The regularly scheduled Saturday evening Mass in anticipation of Sunday should be omitted altogether.

When Christmas Is Celebrated on Monday

Sunday is the original and primary feast day for the Christian people, and the heart of the liturgical year. Christmas, the cele bration of the incarnation of the Son of God and of his birth as our Saviour, is a distinct feast. For this reason, the two celebrations should be kept distinct. It is therefore recommended that no Sunday Mass be celebrated on Sunday evening, in order to avoid any confusion between the two celebrations. If possible, additional Vigil Masses for Christmas should be avoided, and if necessary, only one antici pated Midnight Mass should be celebrated around 10:00 p.m.

The CCCB seems to be pretty clear that this year (Christmas on a Saturday), the 2 days are distinct from each other. They even go so far as to recommend that no Masses be celebrated on Saturday evening (which would be Christmas celebrations) so that people don’t conflate the 2 days together.

Canon Law obliges Catholics to attend Mass on Holy Days, and the CCCB says that they are distinct celebrations. The implication is that both carry a separate obligation (and the recommendations state not to put any Masses in the “crossover” time just to be sure).

Personally speaking, Christmas on a Saturday is not really an issue as I’ll be going Friday evening to the Christmas Eve Mass (not the official name, I know. Just fill in whatever name we’ve decided is correct ), and then again Sunday morning as I always do when I’m at home (not at university).
Christmas on a Monday would be much more of a hassle because I’d probably go Sunday morning then again Sunday evening.

 

[Petergee]

No, not at all.

Yes, I know that principle very well, and in this case there is no ambiguity. Keep in mind that there is also a principle of equality in the law.

The law (in this case the “obligation”) applies equally to all, irrespective of the time on the clock. Let’s say, e.g., an untransferred Holy Day occurs on a Saturday. If those who choose to attend a Saturday evening Mass are given a “2-fer,” the latter principle would be clearly violated since those who attend Mass during the day on the Holy Day would be further “obliged” to attend Mass for the Sunday. (The same would, of course, apply if the untrasnferred Holy Day were to fall on a Monday.)

No that’s incorrect for two reasons.
Firstly the “principle of equality” is one found in most civil legal systems, but not in Canon Law.
Secondly, there is no inequality here. Those who chose to fulfil their obligations by attending Masses during the day on both days, were perfectly free to choose to fulfil the same obligations by attending the one evening Mass. The Church is not forcing some people to attend 2 Masses and letting other people “get off” with attending only one.

 

[malphono]

No that’s incorrect for two reasons.
Firstly the “principle of equality” is one found in most civil legal systems, but not in Canon Law.
Secondly, there is no inequality here. Those who chose to fulfil their obligations by attending Masses during the day on both days, were perfectly free to choose to fulfil the same obligations by attending the one evening Mass. The Church is not forcing some people to attend 2 Masses and letting other people “get off” with attending only one.

Yes it’s correct, but suit yourself.

 

[corsair]

At least this Christmas is simple; mid-night(11:30pm - 1:00am) Mass on the 24th; re-cuperate on the 25th; then to Mass agin on the 26th.

 

[dans0622]

One small twist.

If Christmas (a holy day of obligation) was on a Monday, could one foufill both a Sunday obligation and the christmas obligation by going to a Mass on Sunday night? I enjoy Mass, so I wouldn’t do this, but I wonder anyways…

Canon lawyers are divided on this issue. I think the majority opinion is that two Masses are required. The most detailed opinion on this question can be found in the Canon Law Society of America’s “Roman Replies and Advisory Opinions” of 2008, by Bishop Brian Dunn. He argues, quite well, that two Masses are required. In the same issue, there is also a contrary opinion.

Dan

 

[Petergee]

I saw this in another thread, but here’s what the Canadian Bishop’s had to say about Christmas on Saturday/Monday:

The CCCB seems to be pretty clear that this year (Christmas on a Saturday), the 2 days are distinct from each other. They even go so far as to recommend that no Masses be celebrated on Saturday evening (which would be Christmas celebrations) so that people don’t conflate the 2 days together.

Canon Law obliges Catholics to attend Mass on Holy Days, and the CCCB says that they are distinct celebrations. The implication is that both carry a separate obligation (and the recommendations state not to put any Masses in the “crossover” time just to be sure).

No, the implication is exactly the opposite. The bishops are suggesting that pastors not have a Sat evening Mass so that people don’t get the 2-for-1 which they would get from a Sat evening Mass but have to attend 2 separate Masses, each with its own proper readings etc, to satisfy their obligations. Even though as you said above it is not essential to attend a Mass which actually has the proper readings and prayers for that day in order to satisfy the obligation for that day.

 

[curlycool89]

No, the implication is exactly the opposite. The bishops are suggesting that pastors not have a Sat evening Mass so that people don’t get the 2-for-1 which they would get from a Sat evening Mass but have to attend 2 separate Masses, each with its own proper readings etc, to satisfy their obligations. Even though as you said above it is not essential to attend a Mass which actually has the proper readings and prayers for that day in order to satisfy the obligation for that day.

If you come read it when you’ve already decided what it means.

Look, Bishops in Canada really aren’t known for putting obligations on people (we have a total of 2 HDO besides Sundays: Christmas and New Years, and New Years is one only because Quebec Bishops asked for it as it was traditional. Otherwise, we probably would have ended up with 1). If the Bishops wanted to be clear that you could get a twofer, they would have encouraged people to go to an “overlap” Mass to decrease their obligation, or would have clearly said that you could get a twofer.

Instead, they delineated the 2 celebrations so that people wouldn’t conflate (look it up) the two together. The implication is that you need to attend both because they’re separate.

Bishops are entrusted with saving souls. They have a couple rules: 1, under normal circumstances you can’t wholesale dispense a Sunday obligation; and 2, Christmas is an important day liturgically, theologically, historically, and (less importantly) socially. Bishops are interested in bringing people into the fold, not excluding them (legalizing CITH being an example), so I would think they would be very forthcoming about people getting a twofer (them trying to be pastoral, brining the lost sheep in).

Also, the last time this came up (in 2006 when Christmas was on Monday), the answer was the same: no. Here’s an answer from EWTN (Answer: no twofer). Jimmy Akin also gave an answer (it was also no), and explained the ambiguity in the Canon.

 

[curlycool89]

Just an FYI, I checked this question with a canon lawyer. His answer was that the only way you can get a twofer is if Christmas is on a Sunday (like next year).

 

[Matthew_Holford]

Just an FYI, I checked this question with a canon lawyer. His answer was that the only way you can get a twofer is if Christmas is on a Sunday (like next year).

I don’t quite understand. If Christmas falls on a Sunday then Sunday 25th December is solemnity of the Nativity, which in itself it a holy day of obligation. In effect the Sunday isn’t celebrated because it’s trumped by the Nativity - solemnities rank higher than Sundays in the Christmas season.

So next year there’s only 1 obligation to fulfil - the Nativity. Saturday 24th morning is a ferial weekday; Monday 26th is feast of St Stephen.

In a sense it’ll be similar to fulfilling the usual Sunday obligation, except that you might get the choice of two Masses on the Saturday - late afternoon/early evening Mass of the Vigil and/or late evening/night Midnight Mass.

 

[curlycool89]

I don’t quite understand. If Christmas falls on a Sunday then Sunday 25th December is solemnity of the Nativity, which in itself it a holy day of obligation. In effect the Sunday isn’t celebrated because it’s trumped by the Nativity - solemnities rank higher than Sundays in the Christmas season.

So next year there’s only 1 obligation to fulfil - the Nativity. Saturday 24th morning is a ferial weekday; Monday 26th is feast of St Stephen.

In a sense it’ll be similar to fulfilling the usual Sunday obligation, except that you might get the choice of two Masses on the Saturday - late afternoon/early evening Mass of the Vigil and/or late evening/night Midnight Mass.

The way he put it was that you get Christmas + Sunday (Christmas being an obligation and Sunday being an obligation). Hypothetically you could say that there are 2, but Christmas being the more important celebration displaces the normal Sunday celebration. In effect, you could say that the normal Sunday obligation has been “suppressed” in favour of the obligation to attend on Christmas. Any way you put it, you only have to attend 1 Mass.

The larger point was that no, you can’t attend Saturday evening Mass to count for both Christmas and Sunday this year.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

I have to say I agree with those posters who’ve said we can’t have a 2-for-1. I think there’s a different deal on the table.

If you look at what you have in the US. Your bishops have decided that if a holy day of obligation (HOD) falls on a Monday or Saturday (except Christmas Day) the precept is abrogated. So, you’ve only one obligation to fulfil - the Sunday one. I’m not sure why they did that but I’ll come back to that.

In England & Wales if a HOD falls on a Monday or Saturday (except Christmas Day) it’s transferred to the Sunday and the Monday/Saturday becomes a ferial weekday. The reason our bishops have given is that it prevents us having two HODs in a row. Now to come back why the US bishops did it - I assume for the same reason.

So, if we didn’t have two obligations to fulfil why have the bishops taken one away for us. I think what the bishops have done in practice means that 2-for-1 isn’t and wasn’t available so they did another deal.

 

[Petergee]

If you come read it when you’ve already decided what it means.

That is false and I could easily make the same uncharitable remark about you.

Look, Bishops in Canada really aren’t known for putting obligations on people (we have a total of 2 HDO besides Sundays: Christmas and New Years, and New Years is one only because Quebec Bishops asked for it as it was traditional. Otherwise, we probably would have ended up with 1). If the Bishops wanted to be clear that you could get a twofer, they would have encouraged people to go to an “overlap” Mass to decrease their obligation, or would have clearly said that you could get a twofer.

Instead, they delineated the 2 celebrations so that people wouldn’t conflate (look it up) the two together. The implication is that you need to attend both because they’re separate.

Bishops are entrusted with saving souls. They have a couple rules: 1, under normal circumstances you can’t wholesale dispense a Sunday obligation; and 2, Christmas is an important day liturgically, theologically, historically, and (less importantly) socially. Bishops are interested in bringing people into the fold, not excluding them (legalizing CITH being an example), so I would think they would be very forthcoming about people getting a twofer (them trying to be pastoral, brining the lost sheep in).

No, I think it far more likely that they didn’t explicitly say “you can get a twofer” because quite rightly they didn’t want to encourage people to go to a “twofer” Mass and avoid the others. And you can stop patronising me thank you very much. I have been well aware of the meaning of and frequently using the word “conflate” for decades.

Also, the last time this came up (in 2006 when Christmas was on Monday), the answer was the same: no. Here’s an answer from EWTN (Answer: no twofer). Jimmy Akin also gave an answer (it was also no), and explained the ambiguity in the Canon.

As dans0622 pointed out above, even Canon Lawyers are divided on the question. The Holy See, as far as I know, has not given a definitive answer. And until and unless it does, the opinion that "you can’t get a two fer " is just that, merely one layman’s opinion. You, Michelle Arnold and Jimmy Akin are not popes or bishops or even canon lawyers as far as I know. Whilst I have great respect for these two, this is not the first time I have seen opinions from Miss Arnold which I believe are mistaken. And notice that many comments on Mr Akin’s blog hotly dispute his opinion on this question.

So I suggest at the very least you need to be a lot more circumspect and at the very least concede that a sincere, orthodox and conscientious Catholic who strenuously tried to discover and comply with the Church’s directives could quite honestly and plausibly conclude that he could attend one Mass to satisfy the 2 obligations, and that if he did, he could attend only the one Mass in good conscience without committing a mortal sin.

 

[curlycool89]

As dans0622 pointed out above, even Canon Lawyers are divided on the question. The Holy See, as far as I know, has not given a definitive answer. And until and unless it does, the opinion that "you can’t get a two fer " is just that, merely one layman’s opinion. You, Michelle Arnold and Jimmy Akin are not popes or bishops or even canon lawyers as far as I know. Whilst I have great respect for these two, this is not the first time I have seen opinions from Miss Arnold which I believe are mistaken. And notice that many comments on Mr Akin’s blog hotly dispute his opinion on this question.

So I suggest at the very least you need to be a lot more circumspect and at the very least concede that a sincere, orthodox and conscientious Catholic who strenuously tried to discover and comply with the Church’s directives could quite honestly and plausibly conclude that he could attend one Mass to satisfy the 2 obligations, and that if he did, he could attend only the one Mass in good conscience without committing a mortal sin.

If he didn’t know any better and was mislead. Say, after visiting a certain forum

But, you also ignored the fact that I actually asked a canon lawyer and his answer was that there are 2 obligations (ie, no twofer). His specific answer was actually that a Saturday evening Mass would generally be for those who were unable to attend the Vigil (his phrasing) or the morning Mass. He went on to say that “The Lord’s Day retains its own special centrality in our faith journey.” I see you on the other hand do not have the opinion of a canon lawyer behind yours (I’ll PM you who I’ve got).

 

[dans0622]

If he didn’t know any better and was mislead. Say, after visiting a certain forum

But, you also ignored the fact that I actually asked a canon lawyer and his answer was that there are 2 obligations (ie, no twofer). His specific answer was actually that a Saturday evening Mass would generally be for those who were unable to attend the Vigil (his phrasing) or the morning Mass. He went on to say that “The Lord’s Day retains its own special centrality in our faith journey.” I see you on the other hand do not have the opinion of a canon lawyer behind yours (I’ll PM you who I’ve got).

Hello curlycool89,

Perhaps “Petergee” didn’t drop any names or say that he asked a particular canon lawyer but there are certainly those who would agree with him. The majority of canon lawyers, I suspect, have probably not even formed an opinion on this question. It’s not exactly a pressing topic at canon law schools. Anyway, my unscientific survey suggests to me that the majority opinion agrees with your position. A reasonable argument can be made on the other side as well.

Thanks for your time.
Dan