Chapter — Koch–Preuss
Chapter II: The Observance of Sundays and Holydays of Obligation
I. Meaning and Purpose of This Commandment
Man, being dependent upon God every moment of his life, and constantly enjoying His blessings, naturally owes Him supreme worship and adoration always. The devout Catholic must, therefore, make his whole life, as it were, an act of uninterrupted divine service. But since it is impossible for him to worship His Maker actually at every moment, without interruption, the divine and the ecclesiastical law has set aside certain seasons in which he is bound to serve God more assiduously and to worship Him in a special manner.
“By this [the third] precept of the Law,” says the Roman Catechism, “‘is prescribed in due order that external worship which is due by us to God; for this is as it were a fruit of the preceding precept. Led by the faith and hope that we repose in Him, to worship Him piously in our inmost souls, we cannot but adore Him with external worship and thanksgiving. And as this is a duty which cannot be easily discharged by those who are detained by the occupations of human affairs, a fixed time has been appointed, when it may.be conveniently performed.”1
1 Cat. Rom., P. III, c. 4, qu. 1: “By this [third] precept of the law that external worship which is owed by us to God is rightly and orderly prescribed; for it is, as it were, a certain fruit of the preceding precept, since we cannot but venerate with external worship and give thanks to Him whom we piously worship in our inmost affections, moved by faith and by the hope which we have placed in Him. And since these things cannot easily be performed by those who are occupied with human affairs, a certain time has been established in which they may conveniently be accomplished.”
The sanctification of the days and seasons thus appointed by the Church constitutes an essential part of divine worship. “To this it will materially conduce,” says the same authority, “if the people be given to understand and see clearly, how just and reasonable it is that we have some certain days which we should devote entirely to the divine worship, and on which we should acknowledge, adore, and venerate our Lord, from whom we have received supreme and innumerable blessings.”2
2 Cat. Rom., P. III, c. 4, qu. 26: “It is of very great value that the people should understand and plainly perceive how just and consonant with reason it is that we should have certain days which we devote wholly to divine worship, and that we should acknowledge, worship, and venerate our Lord, from whom we have received the greatest and innumerable benefits.”
And again: “The worship of God and the practice of religion, which are expressed in this precept, exist in the law of nature, since it is ordained by nature that we should spend some hours in those things that belong to the worship of God, a proof of which is that we find among all nations certain fixed public festivals, which were consecrated to the performance of sacred and divine things.”3
3 Ibid., qu. 6: “The worship of God and religion which is expressed by this [third] precept has its origin in the law of nature, since nature has arranged that we should occupy some hours in those things which pertain to the worship of God. As proof of this, we see that among all nations there have been certain fixed and public feast days which were consecrated to sacred and divine things.”
- Under the New Dispensation Sunday takes the place of the ancient Jewish Sabbath. The commandment which bade men to keep holy the Sabbath day was partly moral and partly ceremonial. It was moral in so far as man is obliged by the moral law of nature to devote some time exclusively to the worship of God; it was purely ceremonial in so far as it fixed the time to be devoted to this service. As a ceremonial precept, the law was susceptible of being changed, and was actually changed for prudent reasons by the Apostles.4 Whereas the Jewish observance of the Sabbath served as a reminder of the creation of the world, which was the first creative act of God, the celebration of the Christian Sunday is intended to remind us of the second or higher creation, namely, the redemption of the human race by the Son of God, more especially His Resurrection and the sending of the Holy Ghost, the seal and assurance of redemption. The true meaning of the commandment is that man shall set aside a certain period of time during which he refrains from bodily labor and devotes himself to divine worship.5
4 Acts XX, 7; 1 Cor. XVI, 2; Apoc. I, 10.—St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 2a 2ae, qu. 122, art. 4, ad 4: “The observance of the Lord’s day in the New Law succeeds the observance of the Sabbath, not by force of the precept of the law, but by the institution of the Church and the custom of the Christian people.”—Cat. Rom., P. III, c. 4, qu. 18.
5 Gen. II, 3; Ex. XX, 8–11; XXXI, 17; Deut. V, 12 sqq.—St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 1a 2ae, qu. 103, art. 3, ad 4: “The Sabbath, which signified the first creation, is changed into the Lord’s day, on which the new creation begun in the resurrection of Christ is commemorated.”—Cat. Rom., P. III, c. 4, qu. 1: “The true and proper sense of this precept tends to this, that man should apply both mind and body to this care: that, at a certain appointed time, free from business and bodily labors, he piously worship and venerate God.”—J. Winkler, Der Sonntag, Lucerne 1847, pp. 46 sqq.; G. Müller, Sabbat und Sonntag, Bremen 1898; J. Hehn, Der Israelitische Sabbat, Münster 1909.
- Besides Sunday, the Church has set aside certain festival days, known as holydays of obligation. This was done with a twofold purpose, first, to recall to the faithful particular mysteries of the Redemption and to induce them to venerate the Saints,—men and women in whom the grace of Jesus Christ has proved itself extraordinarily effective; secondly, to spur them on to insure their own sanctification by following the example of Christ and His Saints. The feasts of the Saints are in the last analysis, feasts of our Lord Himself, who has given them the grace to conquer sin, death, and the world. These feasts should serve primarily to glorify God, through whom the Saints were able to practice virtue; secondarily, to thank Him, the Giver of all good things, for the graces and favors by means of which He has chosen them for His fa- vorite children and made them co-heirs of Heaven. These festivals should, moreover, serve to remind us of our own helplessness. Being unworthy sinners, who have no right to be heard by God, we ask the Saints to intercede for us at the throne of mercy.6
6 1 Cor. XV, 57; 1 John V, 4.—Cat. Rom., P. III, c. 4, qu. 19: “Other feast days, however, were instituted from the beginning of the Church and then in subsequent times by the apostles and our holy Fathers, so that we might piously and holily cultivate the memory of God’s benefits. Among them those days are held most celebrated which are consecrated by religion because of the mysteries of our redemption; then those which are dedicated to the most holy Virgin Mary, then to the apostles and martyrs and the other saints reigning with Christ, in whose victory the goodness and power of God are praised, due honors are paid to them, and the faithful people are incited to their imitation.”—St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 2a 2ae, qu. 13, art. 1, ad 2: “God is praised in His saints insofar as the works which God effects in the saints are praised.”—On the relation of the Old Testament holydays to those of the New Testament see St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 1a 2ae, qu. 103, art. 3, ad 4.
Holydays of obligation must be kept in the same way as Sundays.
II. in What Sunday and Holyday Observance Consists
The commandment to keep holy the Sundays and holydays of obligation involves a twofold duty, namely, to abstain from servile work and to participate in certain prescribed acts of worship.
- Abstaining from servile labor and attending religious services are integral constituents of the one and eternal idea that has found expression in the Decalogue, and can no more be separated than body and soul in man. The body honors God by resting, the soul by participating in divine worship. In both respects the sanctification of the Sunday corresponds to a necessity of human nature and is to be regarded as part of the natural law, which has merely been determined in a more precise way by positive law.7
7 F. X. Linsenmann, Lehrbuch der Moraltheologie, pp. 370 sq.
The ethical, economic, and hygienic importance of the Christian observance of Sundays and holydays is now pretty generally acknowledged, and there is hardly a civilized State that does not consider it part of its duty to enforce Sunday rest and the observance of such additional holidays as it officially recognizes.8
8 G. Uhlhorn, Ueber die Sonntagsfrage in ihrer sozialen Bedeutung, Leipsic 1870; P. Niemeyer, Die Sonntagsruhe vom Standpunkte der Gesundheitslehre, Berlin 1876; R. Engelbert, Der Sonntag, Leipsic 1898; P. Engelmann, Le Repos du Dimanche dans l’Industrie, Paris 1899; Jos. Husslein, S.J., The World Problem, New York 1918, p. 82.
- Sunday is not only a day of prayer, it is also a day of rest. As man requires a certain number of hours daily for sleep, so he needs a periodical respite from work. That the observance of Sunday as a day of rest corresponds to a deep-seated need of human nature is evident from the venerable age of this institution, as well as from the fact that, when the French government, at the time of the Revolution, attempted to substitute the tenth for the traditional seventh day, the people refused to accept the change.
The universal experience of mankind shows that servile work on Sunday is unhygienic and economically unprofitable. Sunday observance increases the laboring man’s capacity for work and tends to lengthen his life.9
9 Cfr. P. Barth, Schlaf und Sonntag, Basle 1899.
- Sunday is also a day of recreation and innocent amusement, by which men may recuperate from their labors and regain some of the lost joy of life.
“The prospect of one day of rest frequently intervening,” says Andrew Carnegie, “gives a toiler something bright to look forward to, without which his life must stretch before him as one unceasing, unvarying drag. In this one blessed day his slavery ceases, the shackles fall. He is no longer a brute—fed and clothed solely because of his physical powers, his capacity to bear burdens—but a higher being, with tastes, pleasures, friends. Life becomes worth living. The man puts on his best clothes—and there is much in this—the woman gives her cottage an extra brushing up. Something extra is prepared for dinner—there is a great deal in this, too—and, in short, the day is marked by a hundred little differences from those of labor—a stroll in the fields, a visit to relatives, or a meeting with neighbors at church, all in their best; and then the swelling organ and the choir—these things lie closely at the root of all improvements; and if ever the race is to be lifted to a higher platform—and who shall dare doubt it?—the weekly day of rest will prove itself an agency in the good work.... The best mode of improving its most precious hours for the toiling masses is therefore a question of infinite moment, apart altogether from the question of its divine character, and viewed only as a human enactment of the highest wisdom. It would seem clear that to make this only respite from manual labor a day exclu- sively set apart for the mournful duty of bemoaning our manifold shortcomings—which must at best give rise to gloomy thoughts—would defeat the purposes I have indicated. I want a compromise—church service in the morning, with a sermon ‘leaning to the side of mercy,’ as Sidney Smith suggested, which meant that it should not exceed twenty minutes, for, as one wit says, ‘a minister who can’t strike ile [oil] in twenty minutes should quit boring’—and then the fields and streams for the toilers who are cooped up in factories and workshops all the week long, or a visit to picture galleries, or to musical concerts of a high order,... to anything that would tend to brighten their existence. I am now convinced that there is an important change to be made in the mode of keeping our Sundays—the cessation of labor as far as it is possible, to remain a cardinal point, but better facilities to be provided for cultivating the higher tastes of our poor workers, that the day may be to them indeed ‘the golden jewel which clasps the circle of the week.’”10
10 Andrew Carnegie, Round the World, New York 1884, pp. 326 sq.
“The old privileges,” says Bishop von Keppler, “which came from no over-lord, but were due simply to God and the sun, were called ‘sun-rights.’ In the same sense, Sunday may be called the people’s ‘sun-right.’ What rights and what joys are lacking in the individual life when Sunday counts as nothing, when servile work burdens the Lord’s Day or debauchery dishonors it! The day is made a day of real joy through a wonderful combination of the natural and supernatural pleasures contributed by godly rest, the loosening of labor’s yoke, the united worship of God, the sermon at high mass, the outing in the fields and woods, and the hours of quiet enjoyment at the family hearth. In the Hymelstras11 Brother Stephen gives a charming description of the father of a family taking ‘his little folk’ to the sermon and afterwards asking them what they have heard, supplementing their observations with his own. Then he gets his little drink and sings his good little song, and ‘thus he and his little flock were happy in the Lord.’”12
11 Published at Augsburg, Germany, in 1484.
12 P. W. von Keppler, More Joy, tr. by Jos. McSorley, C.S.P., St. Louis 1914, p. 93.
In his Book of Childhood, Bogumil Goltz has described the fascination of Sunday for the child mind: “Ah! on this day nothing was the same as on school days and work days. We felt the difference in the air we breathed and the soil we trod; we drank it in with the very water. The sunbeams flashed it into the soul; the sparrows twittered it among the notes of the church organ; the trees told it to one another with rustling leaves. Before sunrise, in the grey dawn, the coming hours of happiness were borne on the wings of the morning wind to this chosen day. O Lord, my God, in very truth it was Sunday, —Sunday in every hour and minute, in every twinkling of an eye, in every flash of a sunbeam, in every throb of the pulse, in every drop of blood, in all the body and all the soul. One could hear and see nothing, be aware of nothing, will nothing, think nothing, but just that it was Sunday, the sacred day. All that one looked at or experienced, was different from that on other days,—the same and yet not the same, for it was illumined, hallowed, and invested with the mysterious radiance of Sunday.”13
13 Quoted by Keppler, op. cit., pp. 93 sq.
- In regard to Sunday rest the Church forbids:
a) Servile labor (opera servilia), i. e., the rough and harder sort of manual work which is ordinarily done by common workmen and which used to be done by slaves. This prohibition is based on the very object for which the Sunday observance was instituted. The day could not be devoted to the service of God were men to engage in their usual pursuits.14
14 Lev. XXIII, 25; Ex. XX, 8 sqq.—Cat. Rom., P. III, c. 4, qu. 21: “By these words we are first instructed altogether to avoid whatever things can hinder divine worship. For it can easily be perceived that every kind of servile work is prohibited, not indeed because it is shameful or evil in its own nature, but because it draws our mind away from divine worship, which is the end of the precept.”
Any work that is in itself servile, retains this characteristic even if performed for pleasure or to while away the time.’ Contrariwise, any occupation that is not in itself servile, does not become such if performed for material gain or accompanied by bodily fatigue, for the intention of the doer does not change the nature of the work.15
15 H. Busembaum, S.J., Medulla Theol. Mor., l. III, tr. 3, c. 1, dub. 1, resp. I, n. 1: “Whether it is done for profit or recreation, with this or that intention—pious, vain, or shameful—is irrelevant to the nature of servile work.”—Ibid., n. 2: “It is likewise irrelevant whether it is done with fatigue and labor or not, whether for a short or a long time, etc., because none of these things changes the nature of the work.”
Opposed to servile labor, and consequently permitted on Sundays, are (1) the so-called opera liberalia or artes liberales, i. e., all work predominantly intellectual and aiming at the development of the mind, such as reading, writing, instructing others, etc.; (2) the so-called opera media sive communia, mixed work which serves both the bodily and the spiritual interests of man, such as traveling, fishing, hunting, etc.; (3) do- mestic labors (opera domestica) that cannot be postponed or performed in advance, such as cooking food, feeding cattle, and so forth.
Among the causes which excuse a man from the observance of the law forbidding servile labor on Sundays and holydays of obligation are: dispensation, legitimate custom, necessity, charity (nursing the sick, burying the dead, etc.), piety (the erection of altars, decoration of streets and houses for religious ceremonies, etc.), and the public welfare or security (postal service, running the railroads, etc.).
In determining what is servile work and therefore forbidden, says Fr. Slater, “we must consider not only the nature of the work itself, but also the way in which it is done, the light in which it is commonly regarded, and other circumstances. Thus it is usually held that although the rougher work of the sculptor is servile and unlawful, the more delicate is liberal and may be done on a Sunday. Similarly, fishing with rod and line is not unlawful, but going out to sea with a fishing smack and plying the trade in the ordinary working-day way is forbidden. In the same way one who lives by photography should not ply his trade on a Sunday, but it would not be wrong for an amateur to do the same work on that day by way of recreation and amusement.”16
16 A Manual of Moral Theology, I, 264 sq.
The exercise of the barber’s trade is generally regarded as licit on Sunday because it appertains to the necessary care of the body. Barbers are not, however, on that account dispensed from hearing Mass. One compelled to stay away from Mass would be bound in conscience to look for another position and meanwhile would be excused from hearing Mass only in case obedience to the law of the Church would be likely to cost him his job.
It is to be regretted that so many men are now-a-days compelled to work on Sunday, often under conditions which make it impossible for them to go to church. Thus the Lord’s Day is withdrawn from its sublime purpose and degraded to profane and worldly uses.
The inhabitants of large cities should by all means be given an opportunity to get out into the open and enjoy nature, and the farmer has the right occasionally to visit the city on Sunday without incurring loss of time or money. Traveling is a biological necessity that does not, in itself, contravene the commandment of keeping holy the Sabbath day.
b) The Church further forbids business and court proceedings (opera forensia), such as public sales, the hearing of witnesses, etc., in so far as they disturb the public peace and are thus opposed to the sanctification of the Lord’s Day. Annual fairs that are customarily held upon a holyday of obligation had better be transferred to another day. Theatrical performances, baseball games, and similar entertainments may be permitted on Sundays and holydays of obligation for the reason that, as St. Alphonsus says, “such dem- onstrations of joy are morally necessary to the common weal.”17
17 Theol. Mor., l. III, n. 304: “The reason is that such signs of joy are morally necessary to the commonwealth and are therefore permitted by custom.” (Ed. Gaudé, I, 567).
The prohibition of servile labor and of business and court proceedings obliges, generally speaking, under pain of mortal sin, but admits of parvitas materiae (operis seu temporis). According to a more probable opinion, now held by most theologians, it is not a mortal sin to work, say, two or two and one-half hours on Sunday, provided the work engaged in is not extremely servile in character and does not exhaust the body. Scandal or disturbance of the peace may render even a shorter period mortally sinful. In regard to opera forensia the determining factor is not the duration of the proceedings (quantitas temporis), but the nature or character of the work done (qualitas operis).
- The religious observance of Sundays and holydays of obligation implies: a) The performance of works of piety and charity, e.g., praying, listening to the word of God, spiritual reading, reception of the Sacraments, visiting the sick, etc. The main purpose for which we are commanded to abstain from bodily labor and business on Sundays and holydays of obligation, is that we may be able to devote ourselves more freely to the worship of God and to works of mercy. “We observe the Sabbath fully and perfectly,” says the Catechism of the Council of Trent, “when we render to God the duties of piety and religion; and this is evidently the ‘Sabbath’ which Isaias18 calls ‘delightful,’ for festivals are, as it were, the delight of God and of pious men. If, then, to this religious and holy observance of the Sabbath are added works of mercy, the rewards proposed to us in the same chapter are indeed very great and numerous.”19
18 Is. LVIII, 13.
19 Cat. Rom., P. III, c. 4, qu. 10; cfr. qu. 25–28.
To hear the word of God on Sundays and holydays of obligation is not contained in the letter, but is certainly demanded by the spirit of the commandment with which we are dealing. The Church, by compelling her ministers to preach on Sundays and holydays20 clearly expects that the faithful will listen with fervor and devotion. Attendance at the sermon is demanded, first, by the reverence we owe to the word of God, and, secondly, by the duty we have of informing ourselves about the truths of our holy religion.21 To miss the sermon purposely and habitually indicates lukewarmness and dislike of God.22
20 Conc. Trid., Sess. V, De Ref., c. 2; Sess. XXII, De Sacrif. Missae, c. 8; Sess. XXIV, De Ref., c. 4.
21 Cfr. Matt. XXVIII, 19 sq.; Luke X, 16; Acts II, 37–41; IV, 4; VIII, 5 sq.; Rom. X, 14, 17.
22 Cfr. H. Busembaum, S.J., Medulla Theol. Mor., l. III, tr. 3, c. 1, dub. 3: “Attendance at a sermon is commanded, but not under mortal sin, except insofar as each person is bound to learn the things necessary for salvation. I said, except insofar, etc., because more uneducated men who are ignorant of the principal mysteries of faith, especially those which it has been said they are bound to know under grave obligation, are bound by the law of charity (if otherwise they cannot conveniently learn them) under grave sin to attend a sermon, or rather catechesis. Bonacina adds that in that case even a sermon is to be preferred to Mass.”—Cfr. St. Alphonsus, Theol. Mor., l. III, n. 308 (ed. Gaudé, I, 569).—Cat. Rom., P. III, c. 4, qu. 25: “The sacred sermon must be heard attentively and diligently by the faithful; for nothing is less tolerable or so truly unworthy as to despise the words of Christ or to hear them negligently.”
The word of God should be listened to earnestly, rever- ently, and with an ardent desire to utilize it for the good of the soul.23
23 Matt. XIII, 1 sqq.; Luke VIII, 4 sqq.
It has been asserted that towards the end of the Middle Ages the sermon ceased to constitute an integral part of divine service. This is an error. The medieval confession books, issued for the instruction of the faithful, inculcate the hearing of the sermon on Sundays and holydays as a strict duty, neglect of which is on a level with failure to hear Mass. Bernardine of Busti, an Italian Franciscan, who died in the year 1500, in a sermon declares that every Catholic is obliged under pain of sin to hear the word of God and that those who are uninstructed in the fundamental truths of salvation commit a mortal sin if they neglect to hear an occasional sermon. To the question what would be more meritorious,—to attend Mass or to hear the word of God, he replies that on week-days it is better to hear a sermon, whereas a distinction should be made in regard to Sundays and holydays of obligation: he who is familiar with the truths necessary for salvation must attend Mass in order not to violate the express commandment of the Church; but he who is not well instructed in these truths, must hear the sermon rather than attend Mass, because the latter is enjoined by a precept of the Church only, whereas the former is commanded by a positive law of God.24
24 Cfr. Der Katholik, Mayence 1899, I, 95 sq.
b) To hear Mass on Sundays and holydays of obligation is a strictly binding precept.25
25 Cfr. Vol. II of this Handbook, p. 133.
α) It implies assisting at a whole Mass. He who is unable to hear a whole Mass, should try to be present at least at the essential and integral parts of the Holy Sacrifice, i. e., consecration and communion. Should he be legitimately prevented from assisting at these essential portions, however, he is under no obligation to assist at the remaining ceremonies, which are merely accidental.26
26 H. Noldin, S.J., Summa Theol. Mor., Vol. II, p. 278; Ballerini-Palmieri, Opus Theol. Mor., II, n. 781.
Wilfully to miss any part of the Mass on Sundays or holydays of obligation is a sin,—either grave or light, according to the nature and length of the part missed. The more important parts of the Mass which may not be missed without grave sin are: (1) from the point of view of duration (ratione durationis), the part extending from the psalm Iudica to the offertory, inclusive; (2) from the point of view of dignity (ratione dignitatis), the part from the preface, exclusively, to the consecration; the part from the consecration to the Pater noster; the consecration and communion taken together, and the consecration alone, though not (probabiliter) the communion alone. One who leaves the church before and returns immediately after consecration, does not, strictly speaking, satisfy the precept.27
27 Suarez, De Eucharistia, qu. 88, sect. 2, n. 6; Noldin, Summa Theol. Mor., II, 278 sq.
To determine the guilt of those who come late to Mass, says Noldin, we must look, not so much to the part missed, as to the degree of negligence of which they are guilty and their awareness of the danger of not hearing the whole Mass. He who fails to hurry to church because he thinks he will miss only a small part of Mass, commits a venial sin, even if he arrives after the offertory, whereas he who is in doubt, or anticipates that he will miss an important part of the holy Sacrifice, sins grievously, even if he should arrive in time for the Gloria.28
28 Noldin, Summa Theol. Mor., II, 279.
Does one who hears one-half each of two different Masses comply with the law of the Church? If he hears the two halves simultaneously, he does not comply with his duty, because the Mass, by its very nature, consists of successive parts.29 If he hears the two halves successively, one after the other, and the consecration and communion form part of the same Mass, he satisfies his obligation, because he hears one complete Mass; but if the consecration and communion do not form part of the same Mass, he does not satisfy his obligation because the parts at which he attends do not constitute an integral sacrifice.30
29 Innocent XI condemned the following proposition (n. 53): “He satisfies the precept of the Church concerning hearing Mass who hears two parts of it, indeed even four, at the same time from different celebrants.”
30 Noldin, Summa Theol. Mor., II, 279.
From what we have said it follows that if one has not heard a complete Mass, he is bound, if possible, to supply the defect (obligatio supplendi), under pain of mortal sin if the parts omitted were important, under pain of merely venial sin if they were small and unimportant.31
31 Ibid.
β) The duty of hearing Mass on Sundays and holydays of obligation implies a bodily presence which is both moral and continuous (praesentia moralis et continua). A person is morally present at Mass, (1) if he is morally united with the celebrant, (2) if he kneels, stands or sits somewhere within the church or near it in a place from which he is able either to see or hear the celebrant, or at least to follow the sacred rite by watching those who can see or hear the priest at the altar.
Therefore Mass may be lawfully attended anywhere within the church, including the choir, even behind the organ, or in some side chapel, from which the celebrant can be neither seen nor heard, provided the hearer can follow the sacred ceremony by attending to the ringing of the bells or watching others who are able to see what is going on.
Mass may be lawfully heard also in the sacristy or some other place near the altar, from which the celebrant can be seen or, if the door is closed, can at least be heard.
Those who leave the church for a brief space to ring the bells or fetch the wine, remain morally present because they are participating in the sacrifice and their withdrawal from it is but temporary and for the purpose of co-operation.
One may also hear Mass outside the church, near the door, even though it is closed, provided the ceremonies can be followed by means of the sense of hearing.
The same is true of one who stands some distance away from the church and cannot approach closer because of the attending multitude.32
32 Ibid., p. 280.
The precept of hearing Mass on Sundays and holydays of obligation may be satisfied in any church, in any public or semi-public oratory, and also in private chapels on cemeteries, but not in other private chapels, unless a privilege to this effect has been expressly granted by the Holy See.33
Does one satisfy the obligation of hearing Mass if he goes to confession while the Holy Sacrifice is being of- fered? Since going to confession does not exclude a certain degree of external attention, Ballerini-Palmieri, Génicot, Noldin, and other authors hold that one who goes to confession in the course of one Mass need not assist at another in order to comply with his Sunday duty.34
34 Ballerini-Palmieri, Opus Theol. Mor., 2nd ed., II, n. 773; Génicot, Theol. Mor. Inst., 7th ed., Bruxelles 1909, Vol. I, n. 431; Noldin, op. cit., II, p. 278.
γ) Mass must be heard with a right intention and with due attention.
(1) One need not have the formal intention of complying with the commandment of the Church; it is sufficient to attend religiously, i. e., with a view to worship. Therefore, one who would go to church merely to hear the singing would not comply with his obligation, whereas a boy who went to Mass because he was compelled to go by his parents, would satisfy the ecclesiastical precept.
(2) Attention is internal or external, according as it excludes distraction from within or from without. External attention negatively consists in avoiding every outward activity incompatible with internal attention; positively, in a certain vague consciousness that one is assisting at the holy Sacrifice. External attention at least is necessary to hear Mass, because without external attention the act would be neither human nor religious. Therefore one does not satisfy his obligation if he reads profane books or attentively studies paintings or inscriptions while assisting at Mass. The moral law of nature and the virtue of religion furthermore require that internal attention which is part of the reverence man owes to God. The ecclesiastical precept does not demand internal attention, and, consequently, one would satisfy his obligation under the law even if he were (either voluntarily or involuntarily) distracted during Mass.
As the Church merely requires assistance at Mass, but does not prescribe any particular prayers to be recited during the ceremony, the question what kind of attention is necessary to satisfy the obligation resolves itself into this: whether an act of divine worship can be performed with a distracted mind. Opinions differ on this head; but, as Noldin points out, the opposing groups are not so far apart as it may seem, since those authors who insist on the necessity of internal attention require such a small degree thereof35 that it really does not amount to much more than what the authors of the opposing group mean when they speak of purely external attention.36 Therefore, he says, a man does not satisfy his obligation if he sleeps during a considerable portion of the Mass and is thus unable to realize what is going on upon the altar. But he who dozes so lightly as to be aware, at least in a confused manner, of what is going on, even though he nods during a considerable part of the Mass, satisfies his obligation. The same is true of one who gossips with another, because this act does not preclude that confused kind of attention which is sufficient to satisfy the law.
35 St. Alphonsus, Theol. Mor., l. III, n. 313.
36 Noldin, Summa Theol. Mor., II, p. 277.
Those who play the organ, sing, take up the collection, serve as ushers, and so forth, satisfy their obligation even though they are occupied throughout the whole Mass, because the acts they perform do not exclude the required attention. For the same reason one who would assist at the holy Sacrifice in a half-wake or semi-drunk condition would satisfy at least the letter of the law.37
37 Noldin, op. cit., p. 277.
c) It remains to deal with the reasons that excuse men from attending Mass on Sundays and holydays of obligation. As this precept does not belong to the graviora, any really weighty reason will excuse one from compliance with it. The more common reasons may be conveniently grouped under four heads:
(1) Moral impossibility; (2) charity; (3) office or occupation; (4) custom.
(1) By reason of moral impossibility are excused: (a) Those who live too far away from church. According to St. Alphonsus all, even those in good health, are excused from hearing Mass on Sundays if they have an hour and a quarter’s walk to church, or even less, if the weather is bad or the person weak. Those who are able to ride or drive are not excused, unless the distance is at least twice that which a man can walk in an hour and a quarter. Busembaum adds that due regard should be paid in this matter to the custom of the country or neighborhood.
(b) Those who are afraid of losing their honor or reputation either because they lack becoming clothes, or girls who have become pregnant in consequence of secret fornication, unless they have an opportunity to attend early in the morning. (c) Those who are compelled to travel or are unable to interrupt a necessary journey already begun. (d) Those who have reason to fear a notable loss of worldly goods; but this loss must be considerable, measured by the status and condition of the owner. (e) The sick and convalescent, who cannot attend Mass except with grave danger to their health or a notable retardation in their recovery. Whether such danger is really to be feared, does not necessarily require the decision of a physician or a priest, but may be determined by the patient himself, provided he is capable of forming a prudent judgment. Generally speaking, one is excused from attending Mass if his condition is such that he omits other important affairs involving an equal effort for fear of injury or relapse.38
38 Ballerini-Palmieri, Opus Theol, Mor,., I1,-n. 803,
Not a few persons in delicate health find the air in church oppressive. If it affects them seriously, for instance, by causing difficulty in breathing or fainting spells, they are excused from assisting at Mass.39 (f) Those who work in offices or factories, and whose occupation is such that they cannot get away without grave inconvenience or danger. When there is no real necessity, however, the employer is in duty bound to give his employees time enough to attend Mass on Sundays and holydays of obligation. (g) Wives and children who cannot comply with their duty because it would excite the husband or father to furious anger; also soldiers who would incur vexations on the part of their officers or subject themselves to continuous and intolerable slurs on the part of their fellow soldiers.
39 Capellmann, Medicina Pastoralis, pp. 90 sq.
(2) The demands of charity excuse the following persons from hearing Mass on Sundays and holydays of obligation: (a) Those in charge of the sick and infirm. (b) Those who assist others in case of fire or flood. (c) Those who have reason to hope that by their presence elsewhere they will be able to prevent sin.
(3) By reason of their office or occupation the following are excused from hearing Mass on Sundays and holydays of obligation: (a) Soldiers on duty; watchmen in cities and villages; shepherds in care of flocks; the custodians of buildings in places where but one Mass is celebrated, etc. The superiors of all such persons, however, are in duty bound to permit their subjects or employees to hear Mass whenever possible. (b) Mothers and nurses who can neither leave their charges nor take them along to church. (c) Servants who cannot get away because of urgent duties. These are, however, obliged to hear Mass if they can do so without great inconvenience, e. g., by rising earlier in the morning. In case they are prevented by their employers, they may acquiesce if they have reason to fear serious consequences, but if the inconvenience to be apprehended is light, they should do their duty and bravely make the sacrifice which it involves. If they are regularly or frequently prevented from going to church on Sundays, servants should seek another position. (d) Those who have to prepare food or provide other necessaries of life; but where there are several Masses, such persons, with a modicum of good will, ought to be able to attend one of them.
(4) Custom in some countries or places ex- cuses certain classes of persons from attendance at Sunday Mass. Among these classes we will mention: (a) Women for a month or six weeks after childbirth. (b) Widows who remain secluded at home for a month after the death of their husbands. (c) Brides in countries where it is not customary for them to attend Mass on the Sundays when the banns of marriage are proclaimed.40
40 In the above we have followed Noldin, Summa Theol. Mor., II, pp. 282 sqq.
This is an appropriate place to add a few words about the so-called holy or closed seasons, during which the Church wishes her children to eschew noisy celebrations and festivities. They are Advent, until Christmas inclusively, and Lent, i. e., the time from Ash Wednesday to Easter Sunday, inclusively. During these seasons known as tempora clausa the solemn nuptial blessing is forbidden, though under the new Code the Bishop may allow it to be given for a grave reason.41
41 C. I. C., can. 1108, § 2.
With the so-called Easter duty, i. e., the obligation of confessing one’s mortal sins, if one has had the misfortune to commit such, and receiving holy Communion once a year, during the paschal season, we shall deal infra, pp. 388 sqq.42 The Easter duty binds all the faithful who have reached the age of discretion, and was imposed to remind them of the institution of the Holy Eucharist and to prevent them from starving their souls. “I am the living bread which came down from heaven,” says the Lord; “if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever.”43
42 See also Vol. II of this Handbook, pp. 125, 152.
43 John VI, 51 sq.; cfr. Rom. VI, 4 sqq.; Col. III, 3.
READINGS.—St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 2a 2ae, qu. 122, art. 4.—IDEM, Comment. in Sent., III, dist. 37, art. 5.—Sporer-Bierbaum, Theologia Moralis, Vol. I, 2nd ed., pp. 730 sqq.—St. Alphonsus, Theologia Moralis, l. III, n. 263–307.—W. Wilmers, S.J., Lehrbuch der Religion, Vol. III, 6th ed. (edited by A. Lehmkuhl, S.J.), pp. 468 sqq.—J. B. Wirthmüller, Die moralische Tugend der Religion, pp. 522 sqq.—K. A. H. Kellner, Heortology. A History of the Christian Festivals from Their Origin to the Present Day, English ed., London 1908, pp. 6 sqq.—A. Villien, A History of the Commandments of the Church, English ed., St. Louis 1915, pp. 1 sqq.—J. B. Ferreres, S.J., Comp. Theol. Mor., Vol. I, pp. 383 sqq.—H. Noldin, S.J., Summa Theol. Mor., Vol. II, pp. 273 sqq.