January 9, 2009
Shifting or
Substituting the Sunday Liturgy
And More on Communion and Extraordinary Ministers
ROME, JAN. 6, 2009 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ
Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina
Apostolorum university.
* * *
Q1: We here in Nepal have a very peculiar situation. Sunday is a
normal working day in this country (I believe also in many Arabian
countries). Therefore, over many years (30-plus), we have been
having our entire Sunday celebration shifted to Saturday, the only
day on which people could participate fully. However, this has led
to some confusion: For some people it is hard to feel that the
Sunday obligation is fulfilled by attending Mass on Saturday.
Another problem is the question over what Mass to celebrate on
Sunday. Some of us just repeat the same Mass; some others instead
celebrate the Saturday Mass on Sunday. At times, some of the feasts
on Saturdays are lost because of our particular situation. I
personally miss the Saturday Mass, because I am used to celebrating
on both days. And to add to all this, is our national calendar,
which is different from the Gregorian calendar; the month begins
somewhere in the middle of the Gregorian calendar. For all official
purposes we have to use that national calendar, and most of our
people too use that calendar. For example, we had debates on several
occasions: When is the first Friday of the month? As per the Nepali
calendar or the Christian calendar? -- P.P., Katmandu, Nepal
Q2: Here in our country, very often parishes celebrate the parish
feast on Sundays, e.g. the feast of St Jude's Church, etc. Is this
correct? If the Sunday Readings are not proclaimed but some other
readings pertaining to the feast day are read, I thought that it is
not right to do so. -- M.J., Colombo, Sri Lanka
A: As both questions are related to the Sunday liturgy, I will
attempt to answer them together.
In the first case, it is important to remember that for Christians
Sunday as such is not a transferable feast. During the first three
centuries Christians met on Sunday even though it was a normal
working day, and many of them were slaves taking a great risk. This
often meant getting up very early or perhaps sneaking out in the
evening. (Of course, we are also in an epoch when the mere fact of
being a Christian could lead to a painful death.) As one group of
ancient martyrs famously related to the magistrate who sentenced
them, "We cannot live without Sunday."
Sunday Mass has not lost any of its value or importance to the lives
of Catholics, nor have they become less heroic in defending their
faith as recent events have shown. At the same time, the present
circumstances of Christian living and the Church's desire to care
for the spiritual needs of as many of the flock as possible can lead
to some innovations.
Therefore what is the situation of Sunday in Nepal, Arabia and some
similar situations?
First of all, Sunday always remains Sunday, and the proper liturgy
of the day should always be celebrated. Likewise as far as possible
the faithful should attend Mass on Sunday or on Saturday evening. If
it is necessary and useful, then priests should be willing to
celebrate Mass at unusual times.
In those cases where permission has been granted for Sunday liturgy
to be celebrated on a Friday or Saturday morning because Sunday is a
normal workday, it is important to note that it is not a case of
transferring Sunday to another day. Rather, it is a pastoral
response so that those Catholics who find it impossible to attend
Mass on Saturday evening or Sunday might not be deprived of the
riches offered by the three-year cycle of biblical readings and
prayers.
Canonically speaking, those who are objectively unable to attend
Sunday Mass are dispensed from the precept and in fact have no
obligation to attend Mass on Friday or Saturday Morning. If they do
attend, then they do something that is very good. And when this is a
common situation pastors act well in addressing their spiritual
needs by providing the best liturgical fare while being careful to
avoid the impression that they are moving Sunday to another day.
As our correspondent points out, this can sometimes lead to losing
some celebrations that fall on a Saturday. In some cases it might be
enough to mention the feast in the prayers of the faithful and the
homily; on others it might be pastorally more useful to actually
celebrate the feast on Saturday morning instead of using the Sunday
texts.
The other question, regarding the proper calendar to follow when the
local one is different, is something of a conundrum. In such cases
the local bishops would be the ones to decide. If need be, the
bishop would ask the Holy See for permission to change the dates of
certain liturgical feasts that are tied to the Gregorian calendar,
such as the solemnity of the Sacred Heart.
Since practices such as the first Friday or first Saturdays are
devotional and not official liturgical practices, I see no
difficulty in adjusting the practice to local needs.
Finally, a reply to our reader from Sri Lanka: Since the patron
saint of a parish is usually ranked as a solemnity within the parish
church itself, it is permitted to transfer the celebration to the
nearest Sunday so as to allow as many parishioners as possible to
attend.
* * *
Follow-up: Extraordinary Ministers and Both Species of Communion
In the wake of our comments on Communion under both species (see
Dec. 16), a Drogheda, Ireland, reader asked for a clarification on
the role of the instituted acolyte with respect to purification.
After summarizing the relevant documents, he asked: "Am I right in
thinking that if acolyte, deacon and priest are present, then the
deacon should purify; if priest and deacon are present, then the
deacon should purify; and if priest and acolyte are present, then
the acolyte should purify?"
In a nutshell, yes! This is the proper procedure in the cases
described.
Other readers had asked specific questions about the distribution of
Communion under both species. A Calgary, Alberta, reader asked: "Is
it appropriate to have Communion under both species at weekday
Masses and Sunday Masses in Ordinary Time, or should this be
reserved for feast days and other celebrations? If there is more
than one Mass on a Sunday, can just one of the Masses be in both
species or should all Masses be the same?"
There is no universal answer to this question. The decision as to
when to offer Communion under both species now falls primarily on
the local ordinary who, in some cases, may delegate the decision to
the local pastor.
Distributing the Precious Blood in parishes on weekdays is rare, but
the bishop could permit this practice if circumstances warrant it.
It is quite common in seminaries and religious houses and during
spiritual retreats.
Similarly there could be good practical reasons why a parish would
offer the Precious Blood at only some Masses on a Sunday, for
example, if one particular Mass was so packed that there was real
danger of spillage or of overly extending the time of communion. In
such cases the reasons should be explained to the faithful so that
they may choose at what Mass to assist.
Finally, a Colorado reader asked: "If the body, blood, soul and
divinity of Christ are present in both the consecrated bread and
wine, does not one receive Communion twice if one receives under
both species? If not, why?"
The answer is no! The reason is a tad more complex. Receiving
Communion should always be related to participation at Mass and the
context of completing the holy sacrifice, and not be seen
exclusively from the point of view of the doctrine of the real
presence. This is one reason why the priest celebrant must, with
rare exceptions, communicate under both kinds at every Mass.
Even if one occasionally may receive Communion outside of Mass, it
is always related in some way to the sacrifice in which this host
was consecrated.
In this light, for the faithful, receiving Communion at Mass is the
high point and completion of each person's personal participation in
the holy sacrifice. From the point of view of the sign this
completion is fuller when Communion is received under both species
but are, so to speak, two moments of a single act of communion.
Nor is there any difference, from the point of view of communion, in
receiving the Precious Blood directly from the chalice or by
intinction of the sacred hosts.
At the same time, while Communion under both species is a fuller
sign of participation at Mass, the fact that Christ is fully present
in both species means that reception under just one species is
sufficient for holy Communion.
* * *
Readers may send questions to liturgy@zenit.org. Please put the word
"Liturgy" in the subject field. The text should include your
initials, your city and your state, province or country. Father
McNamara can only answer a small selection of the great number of
questions that arrive.
