Why is live stream Mass not equivalent to being present in person?

  • Thread starter Thread starter why
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

why

Guest
It’s not.

I would like an answer citing authoritative church documents included canon law.
 
Last edited:
I posted this question to Apologetics Moral Theology but some filter moved it to Liturgy/Sacraments. No, this is an apologetics question:

Why is live stream Mass not equivalent to being proximately present?

It’s not.

I would like an answer citing authoritative church documents including canon law.
 
Last edited:
Is there a question needing answering?
 
Last edited:
To attend the mass, you need to ATTEND the mass…???

who would have thought…

if someone asked me if I went to the Superbowl, I would say “no, I watched the super bowl” (unless I actually went, which i didn’t.)

this kind of thing doesn’t need explaining. The original accepted definition of attending an event is if you do indeed attend it. You may be exempt from attending mass in certain circumstances, but watching on TV has never been accepted as attending mass.
 
Last edited:
It’s right there signified by a question mark. I’ll rephrase into a single statement:

Citing authoritative church documents explain why live streaming Mass is not equivalent to being proximately present.
 
Last edited:
Please stop duplicating posts and posting the same question multiple times. That is against forum rules.
 
Last edited:
Let’s make it easier. Since you assume that it IS equivalent to being proximately present, you should easily find the appropriate canon law and documentation to prove your point.
 
An answer might be found in Sacrosanctum Concilium, the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, which is one of the constitutions of the Second Vatican Council.

I haven’t read the whole thing, but I stumbled across these passages. Feel free to read further into it.
27. It is to be stressed that whenever rites, according to their specific nature, make provision for communal celebration involving the presence and active participation of the faithful, this way of celebrating them is to be preferred, so far as possible, to a celebration that is individual and quasi-private.

This applies with especial force to the celebration of Mass and the administration of the sacraments, even though every Mass has of itself a public and social nature.
Click to expand...
and
30. To promote active participation, the people should be encouraged to take part by means of acclamations, responses, psalmody, antiphons, and songs, as well as by actions, gestures, and bodily attitudes. And at the proper times all should observe a reverent silence.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
why said:
I posted this question to Apologetics Moral Theology but some filter moved it to Liturgy/Sacraments. No, this is an apologetics question:
Click to expand...
While it is an apologetics question, it is not a question of moral theology. It’s also not a philosophical question, nor that of Sacred Scripture, nor Social Justice. We used to have a general apologetics category, but unfortunately that was gotten rid of at least a year ago. So I decided to put it in Liturgy and Sacraments instead since your question fits none of the apologetics subcategories.
 
Last edited:
Every sacrament requires physical presence. You can’t phone in a confession, for example.

Some people may not be particularly fond of it, but every liturgical action of the Church to some degree or another is intended to be communal. Jesus intended his Church to be in relationship with one another. You don’t accomplish that sense of community without presence.
 
Last edited:
OK, so you say yourself that it is not equivalent.
emphasized text
Now I’ll ask again, if a live stream Mass is equivalent To being proximately present, there is Bound to be an authoritative church document stating such, right?

So your task is to find the document that states that live stream Mass Is equivalent To being proximately present.

It is much easier, is to not, to find a ‘positive’ and not a negative.

So have at it! Find us your document that states that live streamed Masses are the same as being proximately present. Especially in this whole COVID epidemic. Why, if live-Streamed Masses which have been available for years and years were equivalent to proximal presence, there would have been no need at ALL for bishops to dispense people from the obligation of attending Sunday Mass in person!!!

And yet. . And yet. . .site after site of the US bishops states either that COVID has caused the obligation for physical attendance at Mass to be dispensed for the time being for all. . .or that only a certain number who can ‘fit’ may attend, or that those who are older and physically compromised may still be dispensed.

I think some might even have links to the canon law requirements for that Precept of the Church which requires a person to be physically present at Mass on Sundays and Holydays unless the person is ill, caring for children, sick, elderly, etc.,

So why would you feel that Live Stream Mass is now suddenly ‘equal’ to physical participation when the bishops themselves note that NOT being physically present requires a reason like the above and/or a dispensation from the priest or bishop?
 
Last edited:
why said:
I posted this question to Apologetics Moral Theology but some filter moved it to Liturgy/Sacraments. No, this is an apologetics question:

Why is live stream Mass not equivalent to being proximately present?

It’s not.

I would like an answer citing authoritative church documents including canon law.
Click to expand...
Participation means physical presence.

CIC
Art. 2. PARTICIPATION IN THE MOST HOLY EUCHARIST
Can. 920 §1. After being initiated into the Most Holy Eucharist, each of the faithful is obliged to receive holy communion at least once a year.

Can. 1247 On Sundays and other holy days of obligation, the faithful are obliged to participate in the Mass.
Click to expand...
 
How long has livestreaming Mass been available on the internet? For less than twenty years, I think, from what it says here. Maybe that’s not long enough for a ruling to have been formalized in canon law. After all, as other posters have pointed out, it’s pretty obvious to most people that watching an event on television or in a video is not the same as participating in the event. I can easily understand that no one in the Vatican saw it as an issue that needed to be addressed without delay.
 
While I don’t have a document or link handy, I can give the obvious answer that you can’t receive communion unless you’re in person for somebody to give it to you.
 
I think it is an interesting question. Receiving communion is not required to fulfill the Sunday obligation. What does being physically present really mean? Can you watch the Mass in an overflow room via video? What about sitting in your car in the parking lot of the Church listening to the live stream on the radio which my parish did and encourages.
If one can receive a Papal indulgence by watching a live stream then it seems that watching the Mass live streamed could fulfill the obligation if the Church says so.
 
MarkRome said:
If one can receive a Papal indulgence by watching a live stream then it seems that watching the Mass live streamed could fulfill the obligation if the Church says so.
Click to expand...
Except the Church most definitely does NOT say so.

Livestreamed Mass follows the same rules as live televised Mass.

The Church has repeatedly held that you cannot fulfill a Sunday Mass obligation by watching Mass on TV.

When the Pope visited Philadelphia a few years ago, the Vatican actually reminded Catholics (via press release reported in all the news media) that they could not fulfill their Sunday obligation by watching the Pope’s Mass on TV. The Vatican specifically said that you had to physically be on the Ben Franklin Parkway (a huge street where the Pope was saying Mass at one end, and they had Jumbotrons etc) in order to have the Pope’s Mass fulfill your Sunday obligation. If you couldn’t physically get onto the Parkway, you were expected to physically attend Mass at a church.

Canon law, the catechism etc stresses the importance of the faithful gathering in a group for Mass. It is interpreted as physical gathering.

Broadcast Masses in any media have never fulfilled Mass obligation. They are just a way for people who do not have any Mass obligation (because they can’t physically come to Mass, or because they’ve already satisfied their obligation to physically attend Mass and just want to watch the Pope) to take part in the Mass.
 
Last edited:
why said:
Citing authoritative church documents explain why live streaming Mass is not equivalent to being proximately present.
Click to expand...
Sorry, that’s proving a negative.

Provide something that leads you to believe that watching a livestream Mass is analogous to actually being there.
 
Yes, I know it doesn’t fulfill the Mass obligation. I am just showing that just watching or listening to live streamed Masses doesn’t automatically preclude it fulfilling the obligation. As in the case of the Pope in Philadelphia, the majority of people were actually watching it on a jumbotron. The probably couldn’t hear or see the Pope directly. In this case a live streamed Mass did fulfill the obligation even though you had to go to a designated place.

I would bet the same is true for sitting in your car or in a room at a Church watching on a TV.

The point is, there are instances where watching or listening to live streams of a Mass are acceptable and fulfill Sunday obligation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top