When does "evening" begin on a Saturday?

[FrDavid96]

There has been much discussion of late about just when “evening” begins for the purpose of interpreting when a Catholic may attend Mass on a Saturday, and still be fulfilling the Sunday obligation.

To avoid getting sidetracked on those other threads with this discussion, let’s talk about that issue right here.

Here’s canon 1248.1
The precept of participating in the Mass is satisfied by assistance at a Mass which is celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite either on the holy day or on the evening of the preceeding day.

But just “when” does evening begin? Who defines it? I am unaware of any specific ruling or interpretation from the Holy See as to this, and given the fact that we’re still discussing it, I wonder if such a thing even exists. Many dioceses have a written policy on this issue, and the intent here is not to dispute those policies, but to discuss the situation.

Here’s what we DO NOT have:
Evening begins at XX o’clock
Evening begins when the sun sets
Either of those, or something similar would “settle” the matter. But we don’t have that. So what do we do?

When we interpret laws, we do so in a way that we understand the law according to the “intent of the lawgiver” Who was the lawgiver, and what was his intent? The current Codex was promulgated in 1983 by Pope John Paul II, so that’s an easy one. But what was his intent? I don’t know that he ever expressed his intent…

…or did he?

In *Dies Domini *1998 (“Day of the Lord”) here’s what he had to say in #49 “From a liturgical point of view, in fact, holy days begin with First Vespers” (that is, the evening prayer said on Saturday).

I personally believe that this paragraph truly expresses the “intent of the lawgiver” But what does it mean? Of course, we all understand the literal meaning of the words, but how do we apply those words in a parish setting? How does a pastor know when is the earliest time that a Sunday Mass may be scheduled on a Saturday evening??? In monastic communities, where the Liturgy of the Hours is a communal event, there’s no question as to when Evening Prayer is said. But what about the parish setting where most people aren’t praying the Hours? How do we apply this?

Comments, thoughts, questions???

 

[tee_eff_em]

In *Dies Domini *1998 (“Day of the Lord”) here’s what he had to say in #49 “From a liturgical point of view, in fact, holy days begin with First Vespers” (that is, the evening prayer said on Saturday).

While that quote does indicate the time beyond which a parish might begin celebrating the holy day (ie by a Vespers service, or a Vigil or Anticipated Mass), it too is not an answer to the question When does “evening” begin?

That is: The answers to these two questions are not necessarily the same:

• 
  *]At what time may an anticipated Mass be celebrated?
  *]At what time does evening begin?
  
  For instance, if the answer to the first question is 4pm, and the answer to the second is (as some interpret) noon, or 2pm, or similar, then it is quite possible for the faithful to fulfill their obligation by assisting at a Mass of the day (or a Nuptial Mass, or other celebration) during the hours prior to the time at which an anticipated Mass may be celebrated.
  
  tee

 

[FrDavid96]

While that quote does indicate the time beyond which a parish might begin celebrating the holy day (ie by a Vespers service, or a Vigil or Anticipated Mass), it too is not an answer to the question When does “evening” begin?

That is: The answers to these two questions are not necessarily the same:

• 
  *]At what time may an anticipated Mass be celebrated?
  *]At what time does evening begin?
  
  For instance, if the answer to the first question is 4pm, and the answer to the second is (as some interpret) noon, or 2pm, or similar, then it is quite possible for the faithful to fulfill their obligation by assisting at a Mass of the day (or a Nuptial Mass, or other celebration) during the hours prior to the time at which an anticipated Mass may be celebrated.
  
  tee

• 
  Actually, that’s exactly what John Paul II was saying, that the two are the same. The earliest time of an anticipated Mass is the same as the time when evening begins. That’s the purpose of the sentence in Dies Domini #49
  
  The time at which a parish may begin the celebration and the time at which the faithful fulfill their obligation are necessarily the same time, since they are 2 ways of saying the same thing.
  
  The real question is to ask “exactly how do we define/determine that time?”

 

[jmcrae]

According to my parish priest, here in the Diocese of Calgary, “evening” begins at 4:00 pm.

Typically “evening” Masses in anticipation of Sunday and Solemnities take place at 5:00 pm.

Sunset around here ranges from about 4:30 pm in the winter, to after 10:00 pm in the summer time.

 

[Aramis]

In the Byzantine tradition, Vespers are a corporate act of the parish. It is real clear, then, that DL before is for the day, and after for the next day.

 

[Verbum_Caro]

Fr. David,

Thank you for starting thing thread. (And good find, by the way, regarding *Dies Domini).

*May I make a suggestion for a point of order that you might want to consider asking for? I’ve noticed that threads of this nature often vere off into what one should do. I fully expect some well-meaning person to chime in at some point with “what does this matter? Just go to mass!” or “If you try to fulfill your obligation as early as possible you are pharisee” (or some other permutation of that idea) or “mass isn’t an obligation, it is a privilege!”

You get the idea. Would it be within the spirit of your thread here to state that this is an academic inquiry (which does have practical consequences) but that this isn’t about what we should *aspire to?

*(Myself, I don’t even like anticipated masses! But I’m not going to say that one must not avail themselves of the legitimate option.)

VC

 

[Phemie]

When “evening Masses” were first allowed (1953) they were not to be celebrated before 4 p.m. See “Christus Dominus”. Has anything been written since to change the definition of ‘evening’?

 

[PaixGioiaAmor]

In the diocese of Cleveland, the diocessan rule which is long-standing has been that they may not be celebrated before 4:00 pm.

In the diocese that I am relocating to, vigil masses begin as early as 2:00 pm. The bishop in this diocese is widely known to be one of the most orthodox and faithful to the rules in the nation. I’d have to believe that if he doesn’t have a problem with a 2:00 pm vigil in his cathedral, it must be open to interpretation.

 

[cameron_lansing]

You may find two sites pertinent to your discussion.

canonlaw.info/2008/11/time-period-for-fulfilling-sunday.html

web.archive.org/web/20071017000807/http://blessedsacrament.com/theology/emmanuel/huels.html

 

[Verbum_Caro]

When “evening Masses” were first allowed (1953) they were not to be celebrated before 4 p.m. See “Christus Dominus”. Has anything been written since to change the definition of ‘evening’?

Phemie,

Although it helps, especially in regard to how things developed, I don’t think that document in itself would be dispositive since it only permitted evening Masses on the Holy Day itself. It seems strange to me, though, when you think of it – why the limitation on evening Masses before 4:00 PM? (Remember, this was ON the Holy Day, not an anticipation of or a vigil.) My guess would be a)consistency and b)pastoral wisdom, since this was a concession to those who worked or were occupied on Holy Days, and thus needed a late Mass – not a midday one. (Plus I think the 3 hours fast was in effect. . . so at least people could have lunch if no evening liturgies were before 4PM).

In *Dies Domini *1998 (“Day of the Lord”) here’s what he had to say in #49 “From a liturgical point of view, in fact, holy days begin with First Vespers” (that is, the evening prayer said on Saturday).

I personally believe that this paragraph truly expresses the “intent of the lawgiver”

While that quote does indicate the time beyond which a parish might begin celebrating the holy day (ie by a Vespers service, or a Vigil or Anticipated Mass), it too is not an answer to the question When does “evening” begin?

That is: The answers to these two questions are not necessarily the same:

• 
  *]At what time may an anticipated Mass be celebrated?
  *]At what time does evening begin?

• 
  Fr. David, excellent!
  
  But I think tee_is right, that the **quote **you provided from Dies doesn’t give us the answer. This is academic, but do you see tee_'s point? There really could be a difference between “evening” for the sake of Canon Law and the obligation and “evening” for the sake of when a liturgy should take place.
  
  Case in point – look at Christus Dominus (thanks Phemie!). That freed up evening Masses on Sundays. It also said, no evening Masses before 4:00PM. BUT, if a renegade pastor, or a nice pastor in emergency circumstances, celebrated a mass on Sunday at 2PM that would certainly fulfill the Sunday obligation, even though the liturgical rule was not to have any Sunday Masses between 10AM (?) and 4PM.
  
  So, I really do think that there is a difference between the liturgical rules and the canonical rules regarding obligations.
  
  HOWEVER. . .
  
  You (Fr. David) weren’t just referring us to the **quote **you provided but to the paragraph in *Dies Domini. *(That is why I emphasized these two words in your’s and tee_'s quotes)
  
  Paragraph 49 really illuminated it for me:
  

  1. Because **the faithful are obliged to attend Mass **unless there is a grave impediment, Pastors have the corresponding duty to offer to everyone the real possibility of fulfilling the precept. The provisions of Church law move in this direction, as for example in the faculty granted to priests, with the prior authorization of the diocesan Bishop, to celebrate more than one Mass on Sundays and holy days,(85) the institution of evening Masses(86) and the provision which allows the obligation to be fulfilled from Saturday evening onwards, starting at the time of First Vespers of Sunday.(87) From a liturgical point of view, in fact, holy days begin with First Vespers.(88) Consequently, the liturgy of what is sometimes called the “Vigil Mass” is in effect the “festive” Mass of Sunday, at which the celebrant is required to preach the homily and recite the Prayer of the Faithful.

  Eureka!
  
  This, to me, helps a great deal. It seems clear, to me at least, that Pope John Paul linked the canonical rule regarding how one fills the obligation to the liturgical rule that evening masses (including vigils and anticipated masses) start at First Vespers.
  
  So, Fr. I agree with you that the issue has really become, in light of Dies, when do First Vespers start? What is that answer to that? Local custom?
  
  (It seems to me that there is a strong case to say it *can’t *start before 4PM, since the preceding liturgical hour, traditionally, *None, *is the 9th hour of the day – in other words, the 3PM hour. True, false? Thoughts on this?)
  
  Please, Fr. David, tee_, Phemie, and others, what are your thoughts on all of the above?
  
  VC

 

[FrDavid96]

Phemie,

Although it helps, especially in regard to how things developed, I don’t think that document in itself would be dispositive since it only permitted evening Masses on the Holy Day itself. It seems strange to me, though, when you think of it – why the limitation on evening Masses before 4:00 PM? (Remember, this was ON the Holy Day, not an anticipation of or a vigil.) My guess would be a)consistency and b)pastoral wisdom, since this was a concession to those who worked or were occupied on Holy Days, and thus needed a late Mass – not a midday one. (Plus I think the 3 hours fast was in effect. . . so at least people could have lunch if no evening liturgies were before 4PM).

Fr. David, excellent!

But I think tee_is right, that the **quote **you provided from Dies doesn’t give us the answer. This is academic, but do you see tee_'s point? There really could be a difference between “evening” for the sake of Canon Law and the obligation and “evening” for the sake of when a liturgy should take place.

Case in point – look at Christus Dominus (thanks Phemie!). That freed up evening Masses on Sundays. It also said, no evening Masses before 4:00PM. BUT, if a renegade pastor, or a nice pastor in emergency circumstances, celebrated a mass on Sunday at 2PM that would certainly fulfill the Sunday obligation, even though the liturgical rule was not to have any Sunday Masses between 10AM (?) and 4PM.

So, I really do think that there is a difference between the liturgical rules and the canonical rules regarding obligations.

HOWEVER. . .

You (Fr. David) weren’t just referring us to the **quote **you provided but to the paragraph in *Dies Domini. *(That is why I emphasized these two words in your’s and tee_'s quotes)

Paragraph 49 really illuminated it for me:
Eureka!

This, to me, helps a great deal. It seems clear, to me at least, that Pope John Paul linked the canonical rule regarding how one fills the obligation to the liturgical rule that evening masses (including vigils and anticipated masses) start at First Vespers.

So, Fr. I agree with you that the issue has really become, in light of Dies, when do First Vespers start? What is that answer to that? Local custom?

(It seems to me that there is a strong case to say it *can’t *start before 4PM, since the preceding liturgical hour, traditionally, *None, *is the 9th hour of the day – in other words, the 3PM hour. True, false? Thoughts on this?)

Please, Fr. David, tee_, Phemie, and others, what are your thoughts on all of the above?

VC

The vigil Mass may begin anytime from the start of “evening”, so the two questions of when does evening start, and when can the vigil Mass be said are one-and-the-same.

We can look at Christus Dominus for reference, but remember that because it applied before the 1983 Codex, we can’t try to apply the current law to a previous time. Example, in 1960, a Mass which began at 2 PM was not allowed, but a Mass which began at 5 PM was allowed. (I think the law might have been something like “before 12 noon” because a lot of parishes where I grew up had 11:45 Masses on Sunday mornings).

I don’t know what the 1917 Codex said about the “Sunday obligation” or how it might be fulfilled (don’t have the text), so unless someone has that answer, we realy don’t know if that 2 PM Mass would have fulfilled the obligation. Since a 2 PM Mass was illicit, it stands to reason that it would only have been done in a true emergency, so the obligation was probably fulfilled. Unlike today, we didn’t have countless priests running around playing games with liturgical laws, so if it happened at 2, there must have been a good reason.

That still doesn’t get us very far though, because although the Holy Day does beginn with 1st Vespers, and therefore the obligation is fulfilled anytime after Vespers, it still doesn’t give us an actual time of day in terms of “what the clock says”, nor does it give us any other objective standard (like sunset). I asked an expert, and the “proper” time for 1st Vespers is 4:00 PM, although for an individual person, this is relative, and for a parish, it can be prayed any time that’s reasonable.

The old indult (or dispensation, I’m not sure which it was, or something else) allowed for Saturday evening Masses if the local ordinary permitted them, to begin at 4:00 PM (or so I’ve read in these threads and have no reason to doubt). That’s also the established time for 1st Vespers. I hardly think this is a coincidence.

The mind of the legislator was “first Vespers.” He said so quite distinctly. We also interpret laws to mean what they have always meant, so if the previous law said 4:00 was the start of evening, and the new law which replaced it simply said “evening” without establishing a time-on-clock, I believe it’s relatively safe to say that the intent was 4:00 for the new law as well.

I must disagree with the scholars who say that evening begins at 12 noon or some other time. Noon is by definition the middle of the day, evening is by definition the transition from day to night.

The hour on the clock will vary by latitude, so in Alaska, 1 PM might very well be evening because certain times of year the sun is setting and night is beginning. But for most of the world, this time simply does not meet the very definition of the word “evening.”

Saying that evening begins at noon simply is not possible unless we re-define the word “evening” to mean the middle of the day. Once we do that, what’s to stop us from re-defining the word “Sunday” to mean “the day before Thursday”?

 

[benedictgal]

In our diocese, the earliest ancicipated Sunday Mass begins at 4:39PM, late Saturday afternoon. However, for the Holy Day of Obligation, the anicipated Mass is at 6:30PM, go figure.

Now, the only time that I can remember the Holy See being specific on the issue of nightfall is found in the document Paschales Solemntatis (please excuss my spelling, I’m getting over a migraine). Here is the citation:

1. “The entire celebration of the Easter Vigil takes place at night. It should not begin before nightfall; it should end before daybreak on Sunday.” [82] This rule is to be taken according to its strictest sense. Reprehensible are those abuses and practices that have crept into many places in violation of this ruling, whereby the Easter Vigil is celebrated at the time of day that it is customary to celebrate anticipated Sunday Masses. [83]

I have had parishes begin the Easter Vigl as early as 7PM and it is very troubling. I realize that this question doesn’t treat the issue of the Easter Vigil, but, this is one such occurance that is dependent on when the sun goes down.

 

[Verbum_Caro]

Hi Fr. David,

The vigil Mass may begin anytime from the start of “evening”, so the two questions of when does evening start, and when can the vigil Mass be said are one-and-the-same.

Hmmm.

Fr., is it possible that there is some miscommunication occurring here? Tee_'s view is that those two questions are not the same, and I for one see exactly what he is talking about. But, I also see what you may be saying. My guess is that we are equivocating the word “evening”.

When tee_ used it he meant, I think, “evening” such that one fulfills one’s obligation. You are meaning “evening” such that one may permissibly say Mass (or pray Vespers).

Taking tee_s meaning – and I think this is meaning we really are trying to address in this thread (the Sunday obligation of the faithful )-- I can readily see that the two questions are not the same.

Here’s why from my point of view: If the faithful have an obligation to assist at Mass on Sunday, and they do assist at Mass on Sunday (Sunday, mind you, not a vigil, not an anticipated Mass), wouldn’t you hold their obligation fulfilled? Would it matter when they assist at Mass, for the purposes of the obligation?

Now it could matter when for purposes of of whether or not it is licit. And I suppose this would apply to the celebrant and the faithful. I mean, if there was a regulation against saying Mass at 3pm on Sunday (for instance, the 1917 Code of Canon Law permitted Mass to be said no later that 1 hour after 12PM Noon), then the priest who did so would be violating that liturgical regulation (and I guess the faithful would be as well.)

But, would that violation in itself mean that the obligation of a priest to celebrate Mass or the faithful to assist at Mass was also unfulfilled?

I guess what I am asking is are we prepared to say that if a priest disobeys a rule about when Mass can be celebrated that either a)no Mass actually occurs (I can’t imagine we would) or b) that the priest didn’t say Mass that day for purposes of his obligation or the faithful didn’t hear Mass that day for the purposes of their obligation?

This, I think, is why it seems to me (and tee_?) that the question of “evening” for purposes of the obligation and the question of “evening” for the purposes of when you can licitly say a Mass COULD be two different questions.

Make any sense, or are we up a gum tree? Again, this is academic, but I hope that you can see the issue that I think tee_ was pointing out.

WITH THAT SAID, however,

I don’t think they are actually separate questions because Dies Domini seems to link the liturgical regulation with the canonical obligation to assist at Mass.

All the rest you said about how Vespers/evening was taken to mean 4PM seems clear to me as well, and given JPII’s presumed intent to make the availability of fulfilling the obligation to coincide with Vespers, the obligation could only be fulfilled after 4PM (or whatever North Pole equivalent ). Surely not anytime after 12 noon.

VC

 

[ChristinaM]

Good question, and I’m not sure if I’m sharp enough to follow the discussion, but here’s another wrinkle: When on Sunday do the Masses stop fulfilling the Sunday obligation, if ever? In college parishes I have seen masses celebrated as late as 9 or 10 pm. Is this licit?

At my alma mater the “student mass” used to be at 6:30 in the evening but was moved to 5:30. I remember hearing/reading somewhere that Sunday Masses were not to be celebrated after 6 pm and IIRC this is the reason my pastor gave for bumping up the Mass time when he arrived in the parish. It appears from the previous posts that this may be from an older code of Canon Law. Has anyone else heard this?

 

[ericka1701]

Just a small side bar, but I think that Masses that break the time rules may have started in dioceses where one priest was serving more than one parish. My own priest is serving 2 parishes at this time, and at one point it was 3. They are at least a 45 minute drive apart, (in most of the counties here in East TN with small populations have maybe one Catholic Church. There are a few that have none). It would be very difficult to hold Mass and hear confession for at least 30 minutes beforehand and then drive and do it again in the time allowed.

God Bless!

Ericka

 

[Phemie]

Good question, and I’m not sure if I’m sharp enough to follow the discussion, but here’s another wrinkle: When on Sunday do the Masses stop fulfilling the Sunday obligation, if ever? In college parishes I have seen masses celebrated as late as 9 or 10 pm. Is this licit?

At my alma mater the “student mass” used to be at 6:30 in the evening but was moved to 5:30. I remember hearing/reading somewhere that Sunday Masses were not to be celebrated after 6 pm and IIRC this is the reason my pastor gave for bumping up the Mass time when he arrived in the parish. It appears from the previous posts that this may be from an older code of Canon Law. Has anyone else heard this?

Mass can be celebrated at any time on Sunday. The canon is clear that any Mass on the day fulfills your obligation, so whether that Mass is at 2 a.m. or 11 p.m. makes no difference. I’ve found no canon that limits Sunday Mass to before 6 p.m.

When ‘evening Masses’ were first allowed (1953) none could be celebrated before 4 p.m. but no limit was put on how late it could be celebrated as long as it was still on Sunday or the Holy Day.

 

[FrDavid96]

Hi Fr. David,

When tee_ used it he meant, I think, “evening” such that one fulfills one’s obligation. You are meaning “evening” such that one may permissibly say Mass (or pray Vespers).

Taking tee_s meaning – and I think this is meaning we really are trying to address in this thread (the Sunday obligation of the faithful )-- I can readily see that the two questions are not the same.
VC

We simply cannot seperate the two questions, because they are alternate ways of saying exactly the same thing.

Mass must begin no earlier than the start of “evening” to fulfill the obligation. Therefore if it’s evening, it’s a Sunday Mass. If it’s not evening then it’s a Saturday Mass. We cannot apply two different standards, one to the obligation of the faithful and another to the obligation of the priest to celebrate.

Let’s make it simple. Say we have a small parish with an elderly resident pastor. There is only one Sunday Mass in this parish. When must the Mass begin? Can the priest have a 2 PM Mass on Saturday which fulfills the obligation of the laity, but does not fulfill his own Sunday obligation to say Mass for the parish? I cannot imagine such a thing applying.

How can we say that people fulfill their obligation by attending Mass anytime in the evening; and at the same time say that a Mass in the evening might not fulfill the Sunday obligation?

We’re simply taking the sentence and re-arranging it to put the clauses in a different order. That can hardly change the meaning.

I think the source of the misunderstanding is that (at least ins some places) bishops have established a set time for when Mass may begin but people don’t want to abide by that decision, so they decide to say “well, I’ll have a different definition of evening that applies to myself”

They post that opinion in publications (online and printed). Well-meaning people share those opinions online and we have confusion.

Let’s look at the 2 questions again
1 At what time may an anticipated Mass be celebrated?
2 At what time does evening begin?

The answer to #1 is “when evening begins” (that’s not precise, but it is the direct answer). Since #2 asks when evening begins, the two questions necessarily mean the exact same thing.

 

[FrDavid96]

Good question, and I’m not sure if I’m sharp enough to follow the discussion, but here’s another wrinkle: When on Sunday do the Masses stop fulfilling the Sunday obligation, if ever? In college parishes I have seen masses celebrated as late as 9 or 10 pm. Is this licit?

At my alma mater the “student mass” used to be at 6:30 in the evening but was moved to 5:30. I remember hearing/reading somewhere that Sunday Masses were not to be celebrated after 6 pm and IIRC this is the reason my pastor gave for bumping up the Mass time when he arrived in the parish. It appears from the previous posts that this may be from an older code of Canon Law. Has anyone else heard this?

ChristinaM,
Under the current 1983 code, any Mass which is held on a Sunday fulfulls the Sunday obligation, so as long as the Mass ends before Midnight on Monday morning, it’s a Sunday Mass. It could be that as a matter of discipline, the bishop has exercised his authority to regulate the liturgy and decreed that no Masses should be held after a certain time, even though such a time would still fulfill the obligation.

 

[jmcrae]

Good question, and I’m not sure if I’m sharp enough to follow the discussion, but here’s another wrinkle: When on Sunday do the Masses stop fulfilling the Sunday obligation, if ever? In college parishes I have seen masses celebrated as late as 9 or 10 pm. Is this licit?

At my alma mater the “student mass” used to be at 6:30 in the evening but was moved to 5:30. I remember hearing/reading somewhere that Sunday Masses were not to be celebrated after 6 pm and IIRC this is the reason my pastor gave for bumping up the Mass time when he arrived in the parish. It appears from the previous posts that this may be from an older code of Canon Law. Has anyone else heard this?

Because Sunday has an Evening Prayer I the previous evening, and an Evening Prayer II on the Sunday evening itself (there is no Saturday Evening Prayer) it is the longest day of the week. Here in the Calgary Diocese, “Sunday” begins at 4:00 pm on Saturday and runs until midnight on Sunday, so (barring other rules) technically speaking, Sunday Mass could begin at any time up to one minute before midnight on Sunday.

 

[Verbum_Caro]

Fr. David,

Thanks for the reply. Again this is academic, because I agree with you about the anticipated mass issue, and I think you’ve laid out the case why this is so. BUT, I don’t think I am communicating my (and tee_'s?) point effectively. I’m not sure if you want to pursue it. (I think its useful because it seems to show where the alternate position comes from, and how to argue against it.)

If you do want to pursue it, thanks in advance. I’m sure it will help me to understand the issues more clearly. So, in case its worthwhile, here is what I’m asking:

Mass must begin no earlier than the start of “evening” to fulfill the obligation. Therefore if it’s evening, it’s a Sunday Mass. If it’s not evening then it’s a Saturday Mass. We cannot apply two different standards, one to the obligation of the faithful and another to the obligation of the priest to celebrate.

Ok, but the question is *why? *Let’s prescind for the moment from considering vigil masses or anticipated masses. Let’s look only at Sunday Masses during the time of *Christus Dominus. *The rule was, until then, no Sunday mass could be celebrated later than 1 hr after midday noon. Christus Dominus allowed for a Sunday evening mass, but only after 4PM.

So here was the rule at the time: masses should not be celebrated on Sunday between 1PM and 4PM.

And the obligation at the time, from the 1917 Code of Canon law was: the faithful are bound to hear mass on holy days of obligation (which includes all Sundays).

So, one finds oneself at a Mass at 2:30 PM on Sunday. Obligation fulfilled?

If not, *why not? *Is it because that 2:30 mass isn’t a mass? (Surely no?) Or is it because attending a illicit mass means de facto that one has not fulfilled one’s obligation? Would you have to go to Mass again at a (licit) 5PM one?

Thanks!
VC