When is Mass Obligation Fulfilled

  • Thread starter Thread starter expectthebest
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

expectthebest

Guest
I’ve always been told that the obligation is fulfilled once communion begins and you can leave if needed at that time. Is this true?
 
The obligation is to attend Mass. Not part of the Mass. The entire Mass.

There is no “rule” that says you can come or go at any specific time and have it “count” or “not count”.

So if you come after it has begun or leave before it is over, is there a reason that would excuse you from the obligation? Such as a sick or fussy child, your own illness, a flat tire, etc? Or is the reason in your control and trivial? It is a matter of prudential judgment.

These are questions to ask yourself as to whether or not you have fulfilled your obligation, or whether you are excused from it, and therefore whether you need to make arrangements to attend another mass or speak to your pastor about your situation.

No one can give tell you that you can leave after X time or arrive before or after X time because the Church has no such teaching. But of course, there will be posters who try. Be aware, those are opinions and not Church teaching.
 
expectthebest said:
I’ve always been told that the obligation is fulfilled once communion begins and you can leave if needed at that time. Is this true?
Click to expand...
The Mass is structured in such a way that it seems to be expected that you arrive before the priest enters in procession, and stay until after he has left in procession. Many people arrive early enough to pray five decades of the Rosary before the opening hymn begins, and stay to pray prayers of thanksgiving afterwards. I think this would be the ideal - I don’t often achieve it, and sometimes I arrive during the opening hymn, due to various situations, and if I’m running late for work at a weekday Mass I don’t stay after the closing hymn.

Leaving before the final blessing feels a bit like walking out of a movie theatre before they reveal who the bad guy was, or going home from a party before they open the champagne - yes, you can say you were there, but your experience of it would be less fulfilling than someone who stayed for the whole thing.
 
Sadly, our priest usually brings this up during the end of mass announcements, to please stay until the end of the recessional hymn. I would estimate about 10% are leaving after communion - usually receiving then walking around the side and out the door.

Father nevers says, if you leave early you failed your obligation though…
 
The blessing at the end of Mass is Jesus’ own blessing through the hands of the priest… I hate to miss that part!
 
Mass is over when the Priest says it’s over, you have been dismissed and you have offered your thanksgiving for the sacrifice you have just witnessed and taken part in.
 
If it is necessary that you leave Mass early, then you would have fulfilled your obligation if you leave after the Communion.
 
Confiteor_Deo said:
If it is necessary that you leave Mass early, then you would have fulfilled your obligation if you leave after the Communion.
Click to expand...
Does that mean after everyone who is going to recieves or one the priest begins to distribute?
 
expectthebest said:
Does that mean after everyone who is going to recieves or one the priest begins to distribute?
Click to expand...
There is no such point in mass that delineates “fulfilled” of “did not fulfill” the obligation. The obligation is to assist at the entire mass.

If one has a reason to withdraw before mass is over, then one may no longer have an obligation. If one has no reason, then one is obliged to remain for the entirety of the mass.

Reasons might include one’s own illness or that of someone in their care, or some other emergency situation.

This is something you should talk to your pastor about if you have a concern about a specific situation. No one here can give you an answer because the Church has no such teaching. Your own pastor can help you determine if you have an obligation or can give you a dispensation in specific cases.
 
When it is no longer your ‘obligation’, but your ‘joy’. Until then, you still have much work to do.
 
expectthebest said:
I’ve always been told that the obligation is fulfilled once communion begins and you can leave if needed at that time. Is this true?
Click to expand...
No!

The priest should be the last one into Church and the first one out after Mass. Anyone leaving in between would need to be in urgent need of medical care (or other serious reason) otherwise leaving is disrespectful to God.
 
expectthebest said:
Does that mean after everyone who is going to recieves or one the priest begins to distribute?
Click to expand...
The Communion in this case is considered to be the priest’s Communion as that is a principal part of the Mass. If you must leave Mass early, you would have to remain until after the priest’s Communion in order to fulfill your obligation. After that, you may leave without committing a venial sin for leaving Mass early since you aren’t capable of remaining for the whole Mass. Just as a reminder, if one were to leave Mass early without good reason, it would be a venial sin even though you’ve fulfilled the obligation.
 
Do you have a quote for that?

Because no where that I know does it lay down rules for when leaving at a part of the mass fulfills your obligation and when it does not.
 
Confiteor_Deo said:
The Communion in this case is considered to be the priest’s Communion as that is a principal part of the Mass. If you must leave Mass early, you would have to remain until after the priest’s Communion in order to fulfill your obligation. After that, you may leave without committing a venial sin for leaving Mass early since you aren’t capable of remaining for the whole Mass. Just as a reminder, if one were to leave Mass early without good reason, it would be a venial sin even though you’ve fulfilled the obligation.
Click to expand...
Is there a source for this?
 
Correct me if I wrong but I believe the above to be an opinion layed out as a fact. As I can’t find any source for this.
 
Confiteor_Deo said:
It’s from Fr. Francis Spirago, a Professor of Theology. He wrote it in a catechism that has an imprimatur from the Archbishop of New York.
Click to expand...
There are many theological discussions on the topic, there are people who will tell you any number of “cut off” points. None of them are Church teaching. A local catechism is good for instruction, but whether written by a priest, a bishop, or a lay person it is not Church teaching. This is, at best, his opinion. Well formed in theological reasoning, but an opinion nonetheless. People want guidelines, so some are inclined to reason it out and give it X, Y, or Z point in the mass, but in fact the mass is an integral whole.

You will not find this in the Catechism if the Catholic Church, in Canon Law, or in liturgical documents such as this GIRM. That is because there is no such teaching or instruction from the Magisterium.

The OP should discuss his situation with his pastor.
 
Confiteor_Deo said:
It’s from Fr. Francis Spirago, a Professor of Theology. He wrote it in a catechism that has an imprimatur from the Archbishop of New York.
Click to expand...
This citation is not appropriate to this question.

Let us be perfectly clear:
  1. Father Spirago was a priest of the 19th century…as were his writings. One cannot present them as though they were contemporary. There have been many developments since 1900 that must be accounted for.
Moreover, he is not citing the teaching of the Church – he is citing the conclusions of certain of the moral theology manualists. In fact, it was this phenomenon which caused the Council Fathers to say in Sacrosanctum Concilium:
50. The rite of the Mass is to be revised in such a way that the intrinsic nature and purpose of its several parts, as also the connection between them, may be more clearly manifested, and that devout and active participation by the faithful may be more easily achieved.
2) People relying on such 19th century commentary today would be seriously misled because such commentary has been overtaken by new developments, thanks to the reform of the liturgy. The consensus of the academy, both professors of theology and professors of liturgy, would not concur that the manualists’ position has validity for today, given the statements of the Council Fathers in the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy.
  1. 1ke is quite correct in saying that there is no pronouncement of the Church that defines how one can arrive late or leave early – at any point – having thereby fulfilled the obligation. There is no need to repeat here post #2 although it takes all the necessary points into account quite well and artfully.
Antiquated notions of the preconciliar era that there were parts of the Mass more important than others parts relative to being present and fulfilling obligations stand against the articulated judgment of the Council and the Council Fathers, articulated also in Sacrosanctum Concilium:
56. The two parts which, in a certain sense, go to make up the Mass, namely, the liturgy of the word and the eucharistic liturgy, are so closely connected with each other that they form but one single act of worship. Accordingly this sacred Synod strongly urges pastors of souls that, when instructing the faithful, they insistently teach them to take their part in the entire Mass, especially on Sundays and feasts of obligation.
4) Rather than consulting 19th century texts for a 21st century answer on the liturgy, you would do far better to consult your diocese’s office of liturgy…or a liturgist or liturgy professor who is living after Vatican II.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top