Unless you are shirking some other important activity by going to a second Mass then it would seem to be a good thing to do.
Priests and deacons do
Do deacons regularly serve multiple Masses?Priests and deacons do
We have deacons. They don’t usually serve at multiple Masses here.
It is acceptable to go to Mass multiple times in a day. We can only receive the Eucharist twice though–and we must attend the entire Mass the second time.QUOTE]
Is this true? I hadn’t realised this. I knew that if you were to receive the Eucharist more than once in a day you had to attend the whole Mass, but I didn’t know it was limited to twice. I’ve frequently been to 3 Masses in a day (I work for the Church) and received all 3 times. I feel bad if I shouldn’t have
Mrs Sally;5545365:
There’s nothing to feel bad about, you didn’t know. Now that you do, you’ll just obey canon law and refrain from receiving more than twice.It is acceptable to go to Mass multiple times in a day. We can only receive the Eucharist twice though–and we must attend the entire Mass the second time.QUOTE]
Is this true? I hadn’t realised this. I knew that if you were to receive the Eucharist more than once in a day you had to attend the whole Mass, but I didn’t know it was limited to twice. I’ve frequently been to 3 Masses in a day (I work for the Church) and received all 3 times. I feel bad if I shouldn’t have
You may receive a third time in the same day but only as viaticum so I don’t think you want to take advantage of that just yet.
Batfink;5546834:
True, thank God I’ve never needed viaticum yetThere’s nothing to feel bad about, you didn’t know. Now that you do, you’ll just obey canon law and refrain from receiving more than twice.
You may receive a third time in the same day but only as viaticum so I don’t think you want to take advantage of that just yet.
Now that the OP has got her answer, I don’t feel as bad about hijacking the thread with a side issue, but do people think that this prescript to only receive twice in one day is commonly known? I kind of think people should be made more aware of it, not that it’s likely to be of widespread concern, but since it impacts on the treatment of Christ present in the Blessed Sacrament it’s the sort of thing I wish I’d known sooner. I’m not suggesting there was any sin in receiving three times when I didn’t know any better, I just wish someone had made me aware of it sooner.
How are people supposed to find out things like this unless kind posters on a forum help them out?! On a basic level, all we were ever taught was that our participation in the Mass was most complete if we shared in the Eucharist and that we should receive every time we attended if possible, making sure we had been to confession, fasted etc. as necessary. My copy of the CIC has Latin and English side by side and ‘second’ in 917 is a translation of ‘iterum’ so I had always thought that ‘second’ was just a best-fit translation and didn’t realise it was to the exclusion of subsequent times. Honestly, what’s a girl to do?!
Maybe it’s more widely known across in the US and Canada? Were you guys taught it in school/first communion class/by parents or something like that or did you just find out by accident when you were older, like me?
That is a good point. Perhaps this is something that should receive attention in catechesis.True, thank God I’ve never needed viaticum yet
Now that the OP has got her answer, I don’t feel as bad about hijacking the thread with a side issue, but do people think that this prescript to only receive twice in one day is commonly known? I kind of think people should be made more aware of it, not that it’s likely to be of widespread concern, but since it impacts on the treatment of Christ present in the Blessed Sacrament it’s the sort of thing I wish I’d known sooner. I’m not suggesting there was any sin in receiving three times when I didn’t know any better, I just wish someone had made me aware of it sooner.
How are people supposed to find out things like this unless kind posters on a forum help them out?! On a basic level, all we were ever taught was that our participation in the Mass was most complete if we shared in the Eucharist and that we should receive every time we attended if possible, making sure we had been to confession, fasted etc. as necessary. My copy of the CIC has Latin and English side by side and ‘second’ in 917 is a translation of ‘iterum’ so I had always thought that ‘second’ was just a best-fit translation and didn’t realise it was to the exclusion of subsequent times. Honestly, what’s a girl to do?!
Maybe it’s more widely known across in the US and Canada? Were you guys taught it in school/first communion class/by parents or something like that or did you just find out by accident when you were older, like me?
Our deacon serves in the 3 of the 7 Masses that occur at our church.
