Article Second. On the Manner of Application

177. Conditions of valid application. In order that the application be valid, these three things are required:

1. That it be made by the celebrant himself: for the dispensation of the fruits has been entrusted by Christ to the priest, from whom he also has the power of sacrificing. Nevertheless it is not required that the application be actual or virtual; even habitual and implicit application suffices: for application is made in the manner of a donation; but a donation once made is valid and remains until it is revoked. Yet although an intention once made certainly is not extinguished by the duration of several months, nevertheless it cannot be extended to a time too long (to several years) without losing its value.

a. But application depends so much on the will of the celebrant that if he applies contrary to the will of his superior, it is indeed illicit, but nevertheless not invalid.

b. A celebrant would effect nothing with this intention: I perform the sacred action for him to whom God, or Christ, or the Blessed Virgin applies it.

2. That it be made before consecration: it should indeed be strongly advised that the application be made before Mass; nevertheless an application made in the Mass itself is valid, provided it is made before consecration: for the sacrifice produces the effect intended by the minister when it is completed; but the sacrifice is essentially completed through consecration.

Those who are of this opinion, that the sacrifice before communion is not yet essentially completed, consequently teach that an application avails which is made before holy communion; but since this opinion has scarcely any probability, applications made after the second consecration are very doubtful, not to say invalid. An application made between the two consecrations is valid according to the opinion of many: for since, according to the opinion which is hardly not certain, the sacrifice is completed only by the consecration of the chalice, its fruits can still be applied before the second consecration.

3. That it be determined explicitly or implicitly to a certain person or to a certain end: for it belongs to the priest to apply the fruit of the Mass, which God does not confer except according to the intention of the celebrant. Hence, if the priest has determined no end or no person, there is no reason why the fruit of the Mass should be applied to one rather than to another, and therefore it is applied to no one. Yet it is not required that the priest himself know or explicitly determine the person or end, but it wholly suffices that another do this and that the priest celebrate according to this intention explicitly determined by another.

a. Therefore these applications are valid: according to the intention of the superior; for him who first gave the stipend; according to the intention of the giver or petitioner; according to the intention noted in the booklet; according to the order in which the stipends were given; for him whom the foundation requires; for him for whom I am bound to apply; for the greatest sinner; for the soul most abandoned; for the soul which is nearest to redemption, etc. In all these cases, objectively or before God, who distributes the fruits of the Mass, there is a true and sufficient determination of the application. But he who from ten intentions offered to him should apply according to one of the ten, determining none, would not make a valid application. He, however, who should apply for all ten collectively would both apply validly and, if he had accepted ten stipends, would satisfy his obligation: for in individual Masses each of the petitioners would receive a tenth part, and when the tenth sacred action had been celebrated, each would have received his whole fruit.

b. It is asked whether an application according to the mind of the Blessed Virgin Mary is valid. In order that the application be valid, the priest himself must apply the fruit of the Mass and must determine, at least implicitly, the person or end to which he intends to apply. Therefore this application is not valid: I offer for him to whom God wills to give the fruits; for him to whom God applies or wills to apply, because the priest himself does not determine the person. But this is valid: I apply for him for whom God wills me to apply, because the priest himself determines the person, namely the one for whom, according to the good pleasure of God, he must apply; just as an application is valid for him for whom a superior wills it to be applied, provided the superior has a determinate will. But God always has a determinate will: for He always wills that it be applied for him for whom it is more pleasing to Him. Now to apply according to the mind of the Blessed Virgin signifies to apply for him for whom the Blessed Virgin wills it to be applied; therefore this application is valid, because the priest himself determines the person to whom the fruits of the sacrifice ought to come, namely to him to whom it is more pleasing to the Blessed Virgin that they come.¹

¹ Cf. Pasqualigo, De sacrificio novae legis, I, q. 169; Suarez, De sacramentis, disp. 43, sect. 6.

178. Whether the fruits of the Mass can be divided. It is certain that the diverse fruits of the Mass can be divided and separated from one another. For sometimes it happens that the fruits of the Mass are separated, without the celebrant willing and intending it. If, for example, the sacred action is offered for one who is in the state of mortal sin, the impetratory and propitiatory fruit indeed will come to him, but not the satisfactory. But even by the will of the celebrant the fruits of the Mass are validly, and sometimes also licitly, divided, as if the impetratory fruit alone is applied to one, but the satisfactory to another, or conversely. Indeed the same fruit is divided among several if the same sacrifice of the Mass is applied for several.

Concerning this matter the following rules can be established:

a. He who is bound from justice to apply the Mass for an accepted stipend cannot licitly divide the fruits of the Mass, but must apply to the one giving the stipend the whole fruit of the sacrifice of which he is capable.

b. Even in Masses for the dead which must be celebrated because of an accepted stipend, the whole fruit, both satisfactory and impetratory, must be applied to them; nor is it licit in Masses for the dead owed from justice to apply the impetratory fruit either to himself or to another. It is indeed not established in what way the sacrifice profits the souls of the dead insofar as it is impetratory, but it is certain that the dead can be aided by the impetratory fruit (n. 175); and likewise it is certain that those who give a stipend for the dead have the right that the dead be aided from the Mass in every way in which they can be aided.

179. Particular questions which are of some importance for the practice of celebrants.

1. Which intention avails, if the priest has made two diverse intentions. It must be answered that the first avails, unless by the subsequent one it must be judged revoked. Therefore: a. if he made the first intention absolutely, so that he willed it to avail, even if, forgetful of it, he formed another, certainly the former avails; b. if, mindful of the former, he made another, certainly the later avails; c. if, forgetful of the former, he made another, the predominant intention avails; but that is judged to be predominant which he would have made if he had remembered the former. But if the intentions are equal, the later avails, since this one is actual, whereas the former is only habitual.¹

Because it will often be doubtful which intention availed, in practice it suffices that the priest at another time intend to apply the Mass to him for whom he has not yet applied it: for one or the other was certainly valid.

2. Whether an application is valid for him who will be the first to give a stipend. To apply a Mass for him who afterward will be the first to give a stipend is illicit, nor is it licit to retain a stipend later given for a Mass previously applied.² And indeed a Mass so applied is only probably valid: for although the intention is determinate in the knowledge of God, nevertheless the sacraments must be administered in a human manner according to human determination. Often an application of this sort will certainly be invalid: for it will often happen that a Mass is said for a cause which does not yet exist (e.g., for a sick person who is still healthy); wherefore the fruit of the Mass would have to be suspended, which cannot be done.

If a priest foresees that Masses will be requested, e.g., for some deceased person, he can at once offer them and afterward accept a stipend for those offered: for the application is valid and licit, as made for a determinate person.

3. Whether an application made for a living person who is believed dead is valid, if it ought to have been applied for him as dead. If the contract is interpreted according to the rigor of law, one so applying does not satisfy, because the end which the one giving the stipend intends is not obtained, namely, by the sacrifice of the Mass, to destroy punishments still to be paid after death. Yet because a living person receives a richer and more certain fruit from the sacrifice of the Mass than a dead person, and because the punishments of purgatory, on account of the sacrifice of the Mass which is applied to him while living, can become shorter and milder, it is not improbably supposed that he who gave the stipend does not wish to urge his right exactly to the line.

If a Mass to be paid is handed over to someone for a deceased male, but he, through error, applies the fruit of the Mass to a deceased female, he has satisfied the intention of the petitioner. For in reality he has two intentions: one general, of applying according to the intention of the petitioner; the other particular, of applying for a deceased male. Now the first intention is predominant, and therefore the second is judged invalid. It comes to the same thing if it is said that the error was accidental, which could not vitiate the substantial act or intention of applying according to the intention of the petitioner.

4. How the application must be determined when stipends are given by many unknown persons, as often happens in pious pilgrimages. The priest can celebrate according to the intention of the giver, because the celebrant has at least the implicit intention of applying to individuals according to the order of time in which they gave the stipends: for he who is prior in time is stronger in right; and thus the application is sufficiently determined.

This holds not only in the case in which the same priest is going to satisfy all the obligations, but also in the case in which several priests receive intentions from a box placed in a church for collecting alms of Masses, or from a heap of stipends collected by a sacristan from various persons; for the celebrant satisfies the obligation if he applies according to the intention of the giver as many times as he has accepted stipends of Masses. For the distributor is judged to have the same implicit intention of handing over stipends according to the order of time in which they had been contributed. The celebrant can also apply the individual Masses to all those who gave stipends, according to the proportion of the stipend; for once the owed number of Masses has been celebrated, individuals have received what was owed to them.³

Question Fourth. On the Obligation of Celebrating

The obligation of celebrating or of applying the fruit of the sacrifice of the Mass can arise from a sixfold title: a. from priesthood; b. from office; c. from stipend; d. from benefice; e. from obedience; f. from promise.

1. Obligation by Reason of Priesthood

¹ Cf. Lugo, De sacram. in gen., disp. 8, n. 121 s.

² Cn. 825, 1. Cf. Lacroix, l. 6, pr. 2, n. 222.

³ The Sacred Penitentiary declared on 7 Dec. 1892 that by this manner of acting satisfaction is made to the obligation of applying Masses for a stipend, provided that the Masses are completed within the time defined by ecclesiastical practice, and that Masses which are offered for a certain day or for an urgent cause are not delayed.

180. 1. Every priest is bound by divine law to celebrate sometimes, unless he is legitimately excused.

Most authors indeed agree in asserting a grave obligation of celebrating sometimes;¹ but not all derive this obligation from the same source. For many affirm that a divine precept of celebrating sometimes has been imposed on all priests, which they prove thus: a. The words of Christ: do this in commemoration of Me, contain a true precept gravely obliging; but this precept does not refer to the priestly order universally, nor to pastors alone, but to the apostles as they are priests, and therefore to all future priests. - But in those words of the Lord there does not seem to be contained a precept of sacrificing imposed on individuals separately, but on individuals taken collectively, i.e., it is prescribed to them that they take care lest the offering of the sacrifice ever be lacking in the Church. b. A priest who neglects to celebrate does not use the grace given to him and frustrates the power handed over to him in ordination; but a grave disorder is contained in this if it happens for a long time: for the sacrifice of the Mass exhibits to God due worship and brings immense utility to men. - But from the power of sacrificing conferred on individual priests, one could infer an obligation of using it also, if it could be demonstrated that the offering of the sacrifice by individuals is necessary; but that the offering of individuals is necessary cannot be demonstrated.

But those who deny that a strict precept and grave obligation are demonstrated by these arguments² concede at least this: that a priest who abstains from celebration for a whole year without an excusing cause (excessive scrupulosity) sins gravely by reason of scandal; for a prolonged omission of the sacrifice of the Mass is regarded by the faithful as a sign of a bad conscience, of depraved life, and of a certain contempt.

2. But how often a priest is bound to celebrate neither divine nor ecclesiastical law determines; authors, however, commonly teach that to avoid grave sin it suffices that he celebrate three or four times in the year on the more solemn feasts, indeed on any days whatever, provided that between them there is an interval suited to avoiding scandal, i.e., provided that celebration is not delayed beyond six months.

Therefore two things are required to avoid grave sin: a. that each year celebration be made three or four times; b. that celebration not be delayed beyond six months. These points indeed are well confirmed by ecclesiastical law: "He who without a just cause has not celebrated three or four times in the year sins mortally and can be punished by the bishop."³

3. A priest who can celebrate daily and neglects this without a reasonable cause, where the custom of celebrating daily is in force, cannot be excused from venial sin; but he does not sin if from a reasonable motive, e.g., of greater preparation, humility, or real inconvenience, he sometimes abstains from celebration.⁴

2. Obligation by Reason of Office

¹ Several times a year, cn. 805 has.

² Lugo, disp. 20, n. 2 ss.; Ballerini-Palmieri, IV, n. 1905.

³ S. C. C., in the month of December 1669.

⁴ St. Alphonsus, n. 559.

181. On the obligation itself. 1. By a divine precept obliging under grave sin, all those upon whom a pastoral office is incumbent are bound not only to celebrate on certain days, but also to apply the sacrifice for the people committed to them. This obligation indeed is of justice, since pastors are bound to it, as to the other pastoral offices, from a quasi-contract.

a. The obligation of offering the sacrifice for the people is contained in the pastoral office itself: Every pontiff is appointed for men in those things which pertain to God, that he may offer gifts and sacrifices for sins.¹ Since the pastoral office in general is of divine institution, the obligation of applying for the people is of divine law. Wherefore the Council of Trent says that by divine precept it has been commanded to pastors to offer sacrifice for their sheep;² and indeed for bishops by absolute divine law, because the episcopate is of divine institution, but for pastors by hypothetical divine law (if and as long as the Church has enjoined this upon them), because the parochial office is of ecclesiastical institution.

b. Therefore by this law are bound diocesan bishops, abbots having jurisdiction over clergy and people with a separated territory, pastors, whether they are secular or regular, and indeed after they have taken possession of the see, capitular vicars when the see is vacant, in mission places vicars and apostolic prefects and quasi-pastors who preside over quasi-parishes, i.e., over parts of a vicariate or apostolic prefecture, then also vicars of pastors, who either administer a vacant parish or hold the place of an absent pastor. But regular prelates, titular bishops, and apostolic administrators are not bound by this law, nor are the cooperators or chaplains of pastors.³

c. Although regular prelates are not bound by strict law to apply the sacrifice of the Mass for their subjects, nevertheless, because pastoral care over their subjects has truly been committed to them by the Church, it is most fitting that they too offer the sacrifice of the Mass for their subjects. How often and when they do this is left to their judgment. If they celebrate Mass for their subjects several times during their office, they certainly satisfy this qualified obligation.

d. Since the pastor must offer the sacrifice of the Mass for his sheep - for the people committed to him - but the deceased faithful do not belong to "his sheep," to "the people committed to him," he is bound to apply only for the living and in reality applies only for them, unless he explicitly extends the intention also to deceased parishioners. But the application to be extended to the dead is only conditional, insofar as it can be done without prejudice to the living, because the parishioners themselves, from the will of the Church, have a right to the entire ministerial fruit of the sacrifice.

2. How often pastors of souls must offer the sacrifice of the Mass for the people the Church has determined, namely on all Sundays and feasts of precept, even suppressed ones; and this indeed even if they do not enjoy suitable revenues and even if immemorial custom stands in the way.⁴

a. Feast days on which it must be applied for the people: 1. of the Nativity of the Lord; 2. of the Circumcision; 3. of the Epiphany; 4. of the Resurrection with the two following weekdays; 5. of the Ascension; 6. of Pentecost with the two following weekdays; 7. of the Most Holy Trinity; 8. of the Body of Christ; 9. of the Finding of the Holy Cross; 10. of the Purification; 11. of the Annunciation; 12. of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary; 13. of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary; 14. of the Dedication of St. Michael; 15. of the Nativity of St. John the Baptist; 16. of Saints Peter and Paul; 17. of St. Andrew; 18. of St. James; 19. of St. John; 20. of St. Thomas; 21. of Saints Philip and James; 22. of St. Bartholomew; 23. of St. Matthew; 24. of Saints Simon and Jude; 25. of St. Matthias; 26. of St. Stephen Protomartyr; 27. of the Holy Innocents; 28. of St. Lawrence; 29. of St. Sylvester; 30. of St. Joseph (19 March); 31. of St. Anne, Mother; 32. of All Saints; 33. of the patron of the kingdom; 34. of the patron of the place; 35. of the Immaculate Conception.

Apostolic vicars and prefects, and likewise quasi-pastors, are bound to apply more rarely than the rest, namely: on the solemnities of the Nativity of the Lord, Epiphany, Easter, Ascension, Pentecost, Corpus Christi, the Immaculate Conception and Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, St. Joseph, Saints Peter and Paul, and All Saints.⁵

b. If a feast day falls on a Sunday, the pastor satisfies the obligation by one Mass; if the feast is so transferred that on the day to which it is transferred not only the office is said with the Mass of the transferred feast, but the obligations of hearing Mass and abstaining from servile work also are observed, the Mass for the people must be applied on the day to which; otherwise, on the day from which.⁶

c. A pastor who is placed over two parishes equally principally united, or who besides his own has undertaken to administer another or others, must apply only one Mass. The same holds of a bishop.⁷

d. The grave obligation refers to the application itself; but the adjuncts of the application (person, place, day) do not oblige under grave sin; therefore by omitting them grave sin is not committed, unless they are often and almost by custom violated.

¹ Hebr. 5:1.

² Council of Trent, sess. 23, c. 1 and c. 14, De ref.; S. C. C., 10 May 1692. Cf. Const. Nuper of Innocent XII; Encyclical Amantissimi Redemptoris of Pius IX, 3 May 1858; In suprema of Leo XIII, 10 June 1882; Cn. 466.

³ Cn. 339 (for bishops), 323 (for abbots or prelates nullius), 466 (for pastors), 440 (for capitular vicar), 306 (for vicar or apostolic prefect), 466 (for quasi-pastors).

⁴ Benedict XIV, const. Cum semper, 19 Aug. 1744; S. C. C., 25 Sept. 1847.

⁵ Cn. 306 and 466.

⁶ Cn. 339, 3.

⁷ Cn. 339, 2; 406, 2.

182. What kind the obligation is. The obligation of applying for the people is:

a. Real, so that a pastor who, impeded by a just cause, cannot apply himself, is bound to satisfy the obligation through another or on another day.

b. Personal, so that he himself must apply, unless he is legitimately impeded.¹ But a legitimate impediment is infirmity, the obligation of celebrating conventual Mass if the pastor is at the same time a canon, or something else which by prudent judgment is judged truly grave.

A grave cause which excuses a pastor from this obligation, according to the declaration of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, is not: alpha. contrary custom; beta. funerals to be celebrated; gamma. a Mass to be said for spouses; delta. a Mass founded for a certain day, which falls on a feast day of precept; epsilon. the persuasion of the faithful, who think that the parochial Mass is always applied for themselves and therefore willingly gather to hear it.

c. Local, i.e., the Mass for the people must be said in the parish church, so that the people can be present at it; nevertheless, if the pastor is legitimately absent, at his pleasure either he himself in the place where he is staying, or another for him in the parish church, can apply.²

d. Affixed to a determinate day, so that it is not licit to transfer the application without necessity to another day, unless it has been granted by special indult.³ But it is not required that the Mass which is applied for the people be a solemn Mass or the parochial Mass itself; the obligation can be satisfied by a private Mass.

To several dioceses, e.g., Metz, there has been conceded the faculty of transferring the application for the people to another following day, if on suppressed feasts there occurs the celebration of a marriage or of one funeral Mass which cannot be anticipated or transferred.⁴ To poor curates it is conceded that, if on that day a rich stipend is offered, a Mass according to the intention of the petitioner can be said, with the application for the people transferred to another day.⁵ To pastors of those dioceses in which on suppressed feast days it is licit by apostolic indult to apply Mass not for the people, but according to the mind of the bishop, it is permitted that they satisfy their obligation not on the very day on which they are bound, nor by themselves, but through another priest.⁶

3. Obligation by Reason of Stipend

¹ S. C. R., 20 Dec. 1864, n. 3128. But the reason why a pastor can fulfill other pastoral duties through another, but must himself apply for the people, is this: because the priestly office of mediator, which is exercised by offering sacrifice, is a personal office. Cf. Pasqualigo, De sacrif. miss., q. 855, n. 7.

² S. C. C., 14 Dec. 1872; Cn. 466, 5.

³ Pius IX, const. Amantissimi Redemptoris, 3 May 1858.

⁴ S. C. C., 3 Sept. 1903.

⁵ Benedict XIV, const. Cum semper, 19 Aug. 1744.

⁶ S. C. C., 16 Dec. 1914.

183. On the stipend itself. It is licit to require and receive a just stipend for the application of a Mass, not as the price of the sacrifice or of the fruit applied, which would be a most grave sin of simony, but for honest support. This is established from the custom universally received in the Church. And indeed, he who is occupied for another in spiritual ministry by divine law requires temporal support from him.²

Mass stipends draw their origin from the offerings of the faithful.³

a. In the primitive Church, during the solemnities of Masses, the faithful gave their offerings (bread and wine) at the altar. From these was chosen what was necessary for consecration (and communion of the faithful); what remained after consecration went partly to the clerics and partly was distributed to the poor. For those who had offered the offerings (in the beginning all present were such), the sacrifice of the Mass was offered.

b. Gradually the offerings of bread and wine ceased, and in their place the faithful offered coins, not however all as before, but only some. When coins were now being offered, it seemed that the very thing which it was licit to offer during Mass could also be offered before or after Mass. Finally, those who offered coins to the priest outside Mass asked that the sacrifice of the Mass itself be offered specially for them.

c. From the seventh century onward it seems to have happened that coins were offered to the priest outside Mass by those who asked that a Mass be celebrated. At the same time the custom was introduced of sacrificing for particular faithful and according to their special intention. Since the offerings from which the stipend of the Mass arose at first had the character of alms offered to the clerics and the poor, the stipend is sometimes called an alms even in our time.⁴

¹ Link, Messstipendien (Regensburg, Manz, 1901).

² Matt. 10:10; 1 Cor. 9:13. Cf. De praeceptis, 12th ed., n. 198; Cn. 824.

³ Cf. Link, p. 22 ff.; Benedict XIV, De missae sacrificio, l. 3, c. 21, n. 1-5; Gasparri, I, n. 535 s.

⁴ S. C. C., 21 June 1625; 5 July 1664; Benedict XIV, Quanta cura, 30 June 1741.

184. On the obligation arising from a stipend. 1. From an accepted stipend there arises a grave obligation of justice of offering the Mass according to the intention of him who gave the stipend: for there intervenes between the priest and him who gives the stipend an onerous contract, which must be observed from justice. Hence the priest who, having accepted a stipend, does not apply the Mass according to the intention of the one giving the stipend, gravely wounds justice and is bound to restitution of the stipend.¹

a. Recent theologians teach as altogether certain by common consent that he sins gravely who fails to celebrate even one sacred action owed from a stipend, although others, because of the contrary opinion of certain older authors, teach that he sins gravely only more probably, unless the quantity of the stipend is grave. These authors falsely measured the quantity of the sin from the quantity of the stipend. The true reason why this sin is grave must be taken not from the quantity of the stipend (unless it was given by a poor person), nor from the gravity of the spiritual loss which he who gave the stipend suffers (unless he asked in grave necessity), but from the will of the Church manifested by so many decrees, which obliges the priest under grave sin, because of the great importance of the matter, to fulfill this contract. But the priest who has not satisfied his obligation is not bound under grave sin to restitution of the stipend, unless the stipend constitutes a relatively grave sum.

b. The contract which is made between him who gives the stipend and him who accepts the stipend cannot be called a contract of exchange or sale, by which the labor intrinsically joined with celebration is exchanged for the stipend; but with most authors it must be called the unnamed contract, I give that you may do, i.e., I give a stipend for support, that you may apply for me the sacrifice of the Mass.² Hence it follows that once this contract has been entered, ownership of the stipend passes to the priest, together with the obligation of justice of applying the sacrifice of the Mass according to the intention of the giver, which obligation he can satisfy either by himself or through another. Therefore, if the priest, even without fault, by a fortuitous event has lost the stipend received, the obligation of applying does not cease, since the thing perishes for its owner.³

2. Those adjuncts also must be observed from justice which are rightly asked by him who gives the stipend, namely of celebrating at a determinate time and place and a determinate quality of Mass, provided the one accepting the stipend has obligated himself to observe these things. Wherefore a grave defect in this matter must be supplied, if it cannot be done otherwise, by another Mass duly celebrated according to the will of the one giving the stipend.⁴

a. If the time at which the Mass is to be said has been determined either expressly or tacitly, namely by the very quality of the intention (e.g., for a dying person, for a happy childbirth, for the happy outcome of a grave matter), it must be applied at the agreed time.

b. If, in a privileged altar, celebration is to be made from an accepted stipend for a deceased person, the priest who enjoys a personal privilege of the altar satisfies the obligation when celebrating at any altar; but he does not satisfy by applying another plenary indulgence, because the deceased person does not gain this so certainly.⁵

He who, through an error committed in good faith, has not satisfied this obligation, e.g., because without a personal privilege he celebrated at another altar, not privileged, is not indeed bound to restore the stipend, but is bound in compensation to apply another plenary indulgence to the same deceased person.⁶

c. He who by reason of a stipend or foundation is bound to say a votive Mass does not satisfy the obligation by applying the Mass of the day, unless a legitimate impediment excuses. Yet since this defect affects not the substance but only the quality of the Mass, it does not exceed venial sin. But he satisfies the obligation of applying for the dead by saying a Mass of a saint, and likewise he satisfies the obligation of applying for the living by saying a Requiem Mass; nevertheless it is in no way fitting that this be done, unless a just cause excuses. For although by reason of the sacrifice there is no difference between one Mass and another, nevertheless by reason of the prayers which occur in the Mass, one profits the dead more than the other.

If, when a stipend has been offered, a Mass is asked in honor of some mystery, of the Blessed Virgin Mary, or of a saint, the obligation is satisfied by this, that the Mass of the current day is applied according to the intention of the one giving the stipend, unless a votive Mass is expressly asked. But it is more advisable that, insofar as it can be done, satisfaction be made to the intention of the one giving the stipend by a votive Mass.⁷

3. It is not licit to accept several stipends for one sacred action, but absolutely as many Masses must be celebrated as have been asked by reason of the stipend given and accepted, even if the stipends are small.⁸

a. That it is not licit to accept several stipends for a single Mass is manifest in the opinion of those who hold that the fruit of the sacrifice is finite; but neither do those who think the fruit of the sacrifice is infinite concede that several stipends are to be accepted for one Mass, both because the title for accepting them is lacking, since daily support is one, and because it has been prohibited by the Church.⁹

b. A stipend can be accepted for one Mass which is celebrated on the day of the Commemoration of All the Faithful Departed, and for the individual Masses which are celebrated on the feast of the Nativity of the Lord. Likewise, for an extraordinary burden and labor, e.g., for a Mass to be celebrated with chant, in a distant place, at a late hour, for several continuous days, etc., it is licit to require a fee greater than the customary one; but in no way is this licit for a spiritual advantage, e.g., for celebration at a privileged altar, before a miraculous image, etc.

c. It is licit to accept a stipend for the application of a Mass which is celebrated for spouses, if the spouses themselves have not given a stipend for the application of the Mass.¹⁰ The same is licit for the application of a funeral Mass, if a stipend has not been given so that it be applied for the deceased person whose funeral is being held:¹¹ for in both cases only the quality of the Mass, not its application, is prescribed by the Church.

d. Nevertheless it is not licit to accept one stipend for celebration alone and another for application, unless it is certainly established that the stipend was offered for celebration without application, cn. 825, 4.

¹ S. C. C., 21 June 1625; 5 July 1664; Benedict XIV, Quanta cura, 30 June 1741.

² Cf. De praeceptis, 12th ed., n. 198.

³ Cn. 829.

⁴ Cn. 833.

⁵ S. C. Indlg., 2 May 1852.

⁶ S. C. Indlg., 22 Feb. 1847. By this decree the Congregation concedes to priests who were bound to apply the indulgence of a privileged altar, and who, erring in good faith, did not gain it, that compensation be made by the application of another plenary indulgence, as the same Congregation declares, 24 July 1885. Cf. Beringer-Hilgers, Die Ablasse, 14th ed. (Paderborn, Schoningh, 1915), I, 568.

⁷ S. C. R., 13 June 1899, n. 4031.

⁸ Cn. 828.

⁹ This proposition (10) was condemned by Alexander VII: It is not against justice to accept a stipend for several sacrifices and to offer one sacrifice.

¹⁰ Holy Office, 1 Sept. 1841.

¹¹ S. C. C., 27 Apr. 1895.

185. On the quantity of the stipend. 1. A priest can licitly accept for a Mass what the liberality of the faithful freely and spontaneously offers.¹ But it is not licit to require anything except the stipend which is determined either by the law of the bishop or, in its absence, by the custom of the place. "If a priest about to celebrate requires more beyond the alms taxed by the bishop, he not only offends against the law of the Church, but also wounds commutative justice";² nevertheless he does not commit the sin of simony.³

a. If a benefactor has given stipends for Masses, but has not determined the number of Masses, the number must be computed according to the stipend of the place in which the offerer was staying, unless another intention of the same can be presumed (cn. 830), as if perhaps at other times he was accustomed to give a richer stipend.

b. If someone by testament or legacy has prescribed Masses to be celebrated, but has not determined the quantity of the stipend, either recourse must be had to the bishop, so that he may prescribe a suitable stipend, or the stipend must be fixed according to the custom of the place.

2. The bishop can prohibit priests from admitting an alms smaller than the customary tax. But a prohibition of this sort, wherever it exists, must not be understood in such a way that, if a reason of mercy or charity demands it, it is not licit to admit a smaller stipend, provided it is declared that this is done under the title of alms. But he cannot prohibit the faithful from giving an alms greater than the customary one, because the bishop cannot prohibit works of piety.

By common law, indeed, any priest can licitly apply a Mass for an alms below the diocesan tax. But if there exists an episcopal prohibition that alms for Masses below the diocesan tax be received, not only secular clerics, but also regulars, are subject to the statute of the bishop.⁴

¹ S. C. de prop. fid., 30 July 1877.

² Benedict XIV, De synodo, l. 5, c. 9, n. 2.

³ Cf. De praeceptis, 12th ed., n. 198.

⁴ Cf. Council of Trent, sess. 22, decree Quanta cura De sacrif. missae; Benedict XIV, De synodo, l. 5, c. 9, n. 2; Cn. 832.

186. On manual Masses to be duly satisfied. 1. In order that the burdens of Masses and manual Masses owed from a stipend be duly satisfied, and that all commerce concerning Mass stipends be avoided, several decrees have been issued by the Holy See, the principal of which are these:

a. S. C. C. under Urban VIII, 21 June 1625, Cum saepe.

b. S. C. C. under Innocent XII, 23 Nov. 1697, Nuper.

c. Constitution of Benedict XIV, 30 June 1741, Quanta cura.

d. S. C. C., 9 Sept. 1874.

e. S. C. C., 24 Apr. 1875.

f. S. C. C., 25 May 1893, Vigilanti.

g. S. C. C., 28 Aug. 1897.

h. S. C. C., 11 May 1904, Ut debita.

i. S. C. C., 22 May 1907.

With the decree Ut debita the dispositions of the new Code, cn. 837-844, almost agree.

Very many dispositions which in the course of time were issued by the Holy See concerning manual Masses are renewed, confirmed, and more accurately determined by the decree Ut debita. According to the mind of the legislator, this decree obliges those to whom it pertains of itself under grave sin, therefore in grave matter under grave sin, in light matter under light sin (n. 4).¹ The summary of this decree is contained in the following points, with those things noted which are modified in the new Code:

2. Three kinds of Masses are distinguished:

a. Manual Masses, whose stipends are offered by the faithful either from their own devotion, as it were into the hand, or from an obligation even perpetual made by a testator to his own heirs.

To manual Masses also belong those which a family by force of inheritance, even in perpetuity, must see celebrated, and which permanently adhere to a church, monastery, confraternity, or pious places, but are not founded, so that they can be applied by any priest.²

b. Masses after the manner of manual Masses, which are founded, but cannot be applied in their proper place or by those who from the foundation ought to satisfy them, and therefore by law or by indult of the Holy See must be handed over to other priests so that they may be celebrated.

c. Founded Masses, whose stipends are received from the revenues of foundations.³

3. Holy Mother Church is very solicitous that Masses which are requested by the faithful with a stipend offered are certainly and duly satisfied; to obtain this end she prescribes several precautions.

a. Rectors of churches and of other pious places, whether secular or religious, in which stipends of Masses are customarily received, should have a special book in which they accurately note the number of Masses received, the intention, the stipend, and the celebration. Ordinaries are bound to inspect these books at least every year, either by themselves or through others.

b. Ordinaries of places and religious superiors who commit Masses to be celebrated to their own subjects or to others should quickly enter the Masses accepted with their stipends in a book and should see to it, as far as they can, that they are celebrated as soon as possible.

c. All priests, whether secular or religious, must carefully note what intentions they have received and which they have satisfied.

d. The right and duty of watching that the burdens of Masses are fulfilled pertains to the local ordinary, and in the churches of religious to their superiors.⁴

¹ The whole decree consists of a preface and 15 numbers, to which the numbers added here in the text within parentheses refer.

² S. C. C., 19 Dec. 1904.

³ Cn. 826.

⁴ Cn. 842 ss.

187. On the time suitable for celebration.¹ 1. If the time of celebration has been determined by the offerer either explicitly or implicitly, the priest accepting the Masses is bound to celebrate them at the determined time.

a. The time is determined implicitly by this, that the end of the application is indicated, e.g., for a dying person, for a happy childbirth, for new communicants, for the happy outcome of some grave matter, etc.

b. A priest sins gravely if he does not celebrate within the time suited by reason of the end; and when that time has passed, he is bound to restore the stipend, even if he afterward celebrates, namely when the end for which he ought to have celebrated can no longer be obtained.

2. If the time has been determined by the offerer neither explicitly nor implicitly, the Masses must be celebrated within a moderate time according to the greater or lesser number: if one is to be celebrated, within a month; a hundred Masses requested by the same person within a semester; and another longer or shorter space of time more or less according to the greater or lesser number of Masses. According to the judgment of authors, this more exact determination can be made: if 20 Masses are offered by one and the same person without determination of time, they must be satisfied within two months; if 40, within three months; if 60, within four months; if 80, within five months; if 100, within six months, and so on; if 200, within a year, unless the offerer either asks that the celebration be made within a shorter time, or grants a longer time for it (n. 9).

a. Therefore if someone, with a stipend offered, asks for a Mass, it must be applied within a month; if twenty different persons ask the same priest for a Mass, likewise all must be applied within a month. Indeed, if in some solemnity five hundred different persons offer a stipend for one Mass, of themselves they must be applied within a month.² But if the same person asks the same priest for twenty Masses, it suffices if they are applied within two months.

b. For priests who receive Mass stipends not from the faithful but from the ordinary, by concession of the Holy See the time within which the Masses must be applied begins from the day on which they received the stipends from the ordinary, not from the day on which they were offered by the faithful.³

c. This determination of time must be taken not scrupulously and mathematically, but in a human and moral manner. Nevertheless, that which up to now was handed down by authors, namely that Masses for one recently deceased must be applied within a month, but Masses offered for other intentions within two months, unless they are asked for an urgent cause, can no longer safely be taught. Nor must a distinction any longer be made between Masses to be applied for the dead and Masses to be applied for the living; but the time suitable for application is the same in either case.

d. The precept applies to all Masses which by this decree are called manual. Therefore if someone accepts from a pastor Masses founded in his church to be celebrated, they must be celebrated within the time determined above: for for him who accepts them they are Masses after the manner of manual Masses, although the pastor, since they are founded, could have applied them within the year.

e. Therefore he who without just cause notably defers Masses beyond the prescribed time sins gravely; nevertheless he is not bound to restitution of the stipend, because afterward he can still satisfy the obligation of celebrating. A delay is judged notable if a Mass which was to be celebrated within a determined time is deferred for a month beyond the prescribed time.

3. If the offerer has expressly left the time to the judgment of the priest, he can celebrate them at the time which pleases him more; nevertheless, within a year counted from the time at which he accepted them.

¹ Cf. cn. 834 s.

² S. C. C., 27 Feb. 1905.

³ S. C. C., 27 Feb. 1905.

188. 4. Therefore:

a. It is licit for no one to seek or accept more Masses than he can probably celebrate within the stated time, either by himself or through his subjects, if there is question of an ordinary or regular prelate (n. 1). To these must also be reckoned pastors whose chaplains must celebrate according to their intention.

alpha. Nothing prevents a priest who has already accepted stipends from one or another person from accepting several other Masses from other offerers, provided they can be applied within a suitable time. If, for example, 40 Masses are offered to someone by one and the same person, it suffices if he satisfies them within three months; meanwhile he can also satisfy several other obligations owed either from office or from other stipends.

beta. A priest indeed is not licitly able to accept for himself Masses which he cannot apply within the due time; nevertheless he can accept them for others, i.e., he can declare himself ready to the one offering the stipends to see to it, if it pleases him, that they be applied by another priest.

b. It is licit for no one to accept more Masses than he can probably apply within a year from the day of the obligation undertaken, unless someone spontaneously gives a greater number (n. 3).

The sense of this number will be clear from an example. If to a priest who within the year must celebrate 150 Masses from a benefice, 300 stipends are offered by the same donor, he cannot accept more than 200, because besides those owed from the benefice he cannot apply more within the year. Yet if someone spontaneously gives 500 Masses to a priest, by that very fact he does not require that they be applied within the year, but consents that the application of several be deferred beyond the year.

5. All who are obligated to fulfill burdens of Masses must, at the end of the year, hand over to their proper ordinaries the Masses which they have not yet satisfied, unless there is question of a smaller number of Masses (n. 4).

a. All, whether clerics or laypeople, but especially beneficiaries and administrators of pious causes. Therefore heirs who by force of testament or legacy are bound to see to it that Masses are said, during the course of the year can hand them over to any priest to be celebrated; but if they neglect this, after the year they lose the right of seeing to the celebration by themselves, and they are bound to send them to the ordinary.

b. At the end of the year. If there is question of founded Masses or Masses attached to some benefice, the obligation begins from the end of that year within which the Masses ought to have been applied; if there is question of manual Masses of a larger number, the obligation begins after a year from the day of the obligation undertaken.

c. A smaller number: for the priest licitly retains as many Masses as he can apply within the due time. In the same way he licitly retains those whose celebration, by the will of the donors, can be deferred beyond the year.

d. The proper ordinaries of regulars are regular prelates (generals, provincials, local superiors), to whom regulars must hand over at the end of the year the Masses which they have not yet satisfied.¹

6. In churches (e.g., of pious pilgrimages) in which more Masses are requested than can be celebrated there within the due time, the faithful should be advised by a notice placed in an open place that the requested Masses will be celebrated either there, when it can conveniently be done, or elsewhere.

¹ S. C. C., 27 Feb. 1905.

189. On handing superfluous Masses to others. 1. He who has superfluous Masses which he himself cannot apply within the time suitable for celebration must assign them either to the ordinary, or to the Holy See, or to another priest, with the prescribed conditions observed (n. 5).

He who hands over Masses with a stipend to the ordinary or to the Holy See is freed from every obligation by the very handing over; he who hands them over to other priests is not freed from the obligation of celebrating until he has obtained testimony of the accepted obligation and of the received stipend.¹

Testimony of the celebration performed is no longer required.

¹ Cn. 839.

190. 2. The prescribed conditions are these:

a. As to the Masses. That the Masses be celebrated in that place (church, altar) and at that time (day, hour), as the will of the founders or offerers requires.

b. As to persons. alpha. Intentions of Masses accepted from the faithful or from pious places can licitly be handed over to priests (whether staying inside or outside the diocese), who celebrate them either by themselves or through their subjects, namely where they are handed over to ordinaries or regular prelates (or pastors), n. 8.¹

It is not licit to give Mass stipends to booksellers and administrators of periodicals, even if they are religious men, nor to sellers of sacred utensils and vestments, however much they are pious and religious institutions, nor to any others, however much they are ecclesiastical men, who ask for Masses not with the intention that they celebrate them either by themselves or through their subjects (n. 8). It is clear that by this there is not prohibited that Mass intentions be given or procured for priests so that from their stipends they may buy books or things of any kind.

beta. The priests to whom Mass intentions are handed over must either be known as above all exception, i.e., such that they provide moral certainty that they will celebrate the accepted Masses (n. 5), or must be commended by testimony of their proper Ordinary.²

gamma. Testimony of the received stipend must be required.

This testimony must be required so that the one handing over Mass stipends to others may know that he is immune from the obligation of celebrating. And indeed, to obtain this end for the internal forum of conscience, it makes no difference whether the testimony is written or oral; indeed even moral certainty obtained from the circumstances of things and persons prudently considered seems sufficient for the forum of conscience.

Note. If there is question of Masses to be sent to churches of the Oriental rite: a. it is not licit to send them: alpha. to laymen who distribute them to priests; nor beta. directly to Oriental presbyters; nor gamma. directly to superiors of congregations of Oriental religious; nor delta. directly to titular bishops or simple patriarchal vicars. But b. they must be sent either alpha. to the Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith; or beta. to apostolic delegates, signifying at the same time the number of Masses and the sum of stipends which must be handed over to Oriental prelates existing within the scope of the delegation; or gamma. to prelates having ordinary jurisdiction for priests subject to themselves.³

¹ Cn. 838.

² Cn. 838.

³ S. C. de prop. fide, 15 July 1908.

191. 3. As to the stipend. 1. In transmitting manual Masses, the whole stipend must be transmitted, unless the offerer expressly permits something to be retained or it is certain that the excess above the diocesan tax was given in view of the person.¹

To these one may add another case, namely if the one receiving the stipend spontaneously remits part of the offered stipend:² for he is not prohibited from making donations. That the expenses of transmission can be deducted is manifest.

a. He commits a grave sin against religion who retains part of the stipend in grave matter, even if he expends the retained money for pious uses. That partial retention of the stipend is prohibited by the Church under grave sin is manifest from the penalties previously issued against this manner of acting. But it has been doubted whether by this manner of acting one sins against commutative justice with the burden of restitution, or only against religion. Certainly the opinion of those who deny a wound of commutative justice is probable:³ for the arguments by which the affirmative opinion is demonstrated do not prove the matter. They argue thus: alpha. From the condemned proposition: a priest who has accepted Mass stipends cannot satisfy through another, with part of the stipend retained for himself;⁴ but he who does not satisfy his obligation wounds justice. - But nothing requires that the words of the condemned proposition be understood thus: he cannot satisfy his obligation without a wound of justice; since they can conveniently be understood thus: he cannot licitly satisfy his obligation. beta. A priest accepting a stipend indeed acquires ownership of it, but according to the will of the giver; but the will of the giver is that the Mass be celebrated for such a stipend; therefore he who retains part of the stipend acts against the will of the giver, which pertains to the substance of the contract, and therefore acts against justice and is bound to restitution, not indeed to him who gave the stipend, but to the celebrating priest. - But it is in no way established that this is the will of him who gives the stipend, which is clear from these things: he who has accepted a Mass stipend can satisfy the obligation of celebrating through another, even if he gives no stipend, provided the one conferring the stipend has not expressly demanded that the one accepting himself celebrate the Mass. For if another in place of the one accepting the stipend celebrates gratis according to the intention of the giver, no one doubts that he who accepted the stipend has satisfied the obligation.

b. To administrators of churches who give stipends to outside priests celebrating in their churches, it is not licit to retain part of the stipend under this title, that the celebrating priests pay something for necessary expenses, even if the church is poor. Nevertheless, it is licit for rectors of churches to require payment of expenses from priests wishing to celebrate in their churches as a condition that they be permitted to celebrate in the church, especially if the church is poor, or many priests, or the same priests frequently, celebrate there.

c. To an executor of a testament who, for a certain sum of money, must see that a determinate number of Masses is celebrated, it is not licit without injustice to retain part of the sum for himself because he sees to it that Masses are celebrated where the stipends are smaller: for since he never acquired ownership of the stipends, there exists no title by which he could retain part of them.⁵

¹ Cn. 840.

² Benedict XIV, const. Quanta cura, 30 June 1741.

³ Ballerini-Palmieri, IV, n. 1017; D'Annibale, III, n. 190, note 17; Genicot, Theol. mor. inst., 231.

⁴ This proposition (9) was condemned by Alexander VII: After the decree of Urban, a priest to whom Masses to be celebrated are handed over can satisfy through another, with a lesser stipend given to him and the other part of the stipend retained for himself.

⁵ St. Alphonsus, n. 322.

192. In Masses to the likeness of manual Masses it is sufficient to transmit the stipend of the diocese in which the Mass is celebrated, if the excess takes the place of part of the endowment of the benefice or of the pious cause, unless the mind of the founder stands in the way.

a. Therefore, if the foundation was made in such a way that the celebration of Masses is entrusted to a certain priest, it is sufficient to transmit the diocesan tax. But if the foundation was made in such a way that the celebration of Masses is annexed to some church, the pastor who sees to it that they are celebrated by another must give him the whole stipend,¹ except in the case in which the foundations constitute part of the parochial congrua.

b. For funeral or nuptial Masses, whose celebration by law and custom belongs to pastors, a greater tax is usually given; the pastor can retain its excess, if he sees to it that the Mass is celebrated by another. But if the greater stipend is given by reason of chant, of a later hour, etc., the excess must be handed over to the celebrant, who must undergo the extraordinary burden.

c. If to a priest who accompanies a funeral 5 crowns are offered with the burden of celebrating a Mass, or if to a pastor 20 crowns are given with the burden that a triduum be instituted and three Masses celebrated, it is sufficient that to him to whom the Masses to be celebrated are entrusted there be given the diocesan stipend. But if the Mass to be said is entrusted to a priest existing outside the diocese, the stipend of the diocese of the celebrant must be given. If a Mass connected with a benefice is entrusted to another priest, the ordinary stipend of that place in which the Mass is celebrated must be given.²

The decree Ut debita further admonishes two things:

a. The stipend of a Mass cannot licitly be separated from the celebration of the Mass (n. 8).

Since by these words this alone is prohibited, namely that Mass stipends be given to those who accept them for another end, not for this end, that they pay off the Masses either by themselves or through their subjects, it is not prohibited that priests be asked to accept Masses to be celebrated and then donate their stipends to a pious work. - Nor is it prohibited that, from a just cause of necessity, a priest exchange the intention of a Mass with another, while retaining his own stipend, even though the stipends of each are not equal, but one is greater than the other. For in this case one is judged spontaneously and freely to donate the excess to the other. - Nor, finally, is it prohibited that pastors, whose vicars must celebrate according to the intention of the pastor, retain the stipends of Masses for their sustenance.

b. The stipend of a Mass cannot licitly be exchanged into other things, but must be returned in its own species (n. 9).

alpha. Although it is not licit by means of Masses to sell or buy any things whatsoever, nevertheless it is licit for him who asks for a Mass or Masses to hand over to the priest, for Masses to be celebrated or already celebrated, a book or another thing in place of money, provided this is not done habitually nor turns to the support of some commerce (n. 10).

beta. Both from declarations of the Holy See and from indults and privileges granted by the same Holy See either to bishops or to priests, it was licit to exchange the stipends of Masses with another thing, e.g., newspapers, religious sheets, and even, for promoting a pious work, to hand over stipends to others with part of them retained. But now all these things are obrogated and must be held as abrogated (n. 9). - In like manner there has been revoked the indult granted to more celebrated sanctuaries, by force of which from Mass stipends offered by the faithful they could deduct a part, so that provision might be made for the decor and ornament of the sanctuary (n. 11).

¹ S. C. C., 25 July 1874.

² S. Office, 11 May 1904, Ut debita, n. 15.

193. On the reduction of Masses. 1. From a just cause the Church is accustomed to reduce the burdens of Masses or even entirely to extinguish them.

The occasion of reducing the burdens of Masses presents itself especially when, in the course of time, it has happened that the revenues of a foundation no longer suffice for paying off the complete number of Masses. By a reduction of this kind the founders suffer no damage: for the supreme pontiff supplies the satisfactory fruit by this, that from the treasury of the Church he applies the satisfactions of Christ and of the saints for those for whom the sacred offerings would have been offered; but the impetratory fruit produced from the prayer of the Church he supplies by this, that he directs to this end the prayers which are made in the name of the Church.

2. The supreme pontiff has reserved to himself the power of reducing the burdens of Masses, so that a bishop without a special indult of the Holy See cannot validly reduce the number of Masses, unless the founder has granted this power also to the ordinary of the place.¹

a. When, on account of the smallness of a legacy which has not yet been accepted, reduction is necessary, the bishop can, without faculty of the apostolic see, reduce the number of Masses to be celebrated according to the norm of the customary stipend.

b. From the case in which the sum of the foundation is not diminished in itself, but no longer suffices for all the burdens, there must be distinguished the case in which the very sum of the foundation has perished either wholly or in part, but without fault of him who must celebrate the Masses. In the former case the reduction of Masses can be made by the supreme pontiff alone. If in the latter case the sum of the foundation has wholly perished, the obligation of celebrating the Masses ceases; but if it has perished in part, that must be observed which the new Code, cn. 1517, 2, establishes: "If the execution of the burdens imposed has become impossible because of diminished revenues or another cause, with no fault of the administrators, the Ordinary also, after hearing those whose interest is involved and with the will of the founder preserved in the better way in which it can be done, will be able equitably to diminish the same burdens, except the reduction of Masses, which always belongs uniquely to the Holy See." Thus, if the founder determined a certain stipend for individual Masses, the Ordinary can equitably diminish the number of Masses; but if the founder determined the number of Masses, their reduction must be made by the Apostolic See.

¹ S. C. C., 31 Jan. 1625. Cn. 1517, 1.

194. On the condonation of Masses. Under certain conditions the Church is accustomed to condone the burdens of Masses, whether they are founded or manual. The effect of condonation is twofold: of supplying from the treasury of the Church the fruits of omitted sacrifices, so that the petitioners perceive the same fruits which they would have perceived if the Masses had been celebrated, and of remitting the obligation of celebrating them.

a. The supreme pontiff alone can grant condonation, because he alone can supply from the treasury of the Church for Masses not celebrated.

b. Condonation is customarily granted when a priest has not celebrated several Masses which from foundation or from stipend he should have celebrated, and can no longer celebrate them. Condonation is not granted when there are means or revenues by which past omissions can be supplied.

Note. All the works by which Christ the Lord accomplished the redemption of the human race are contained in the treasury of the Church; but the works of redemption were works of adoration, of thanksgiving, of supplication, of placation, and of satisfaction; therefore there are contained in the treasury of the Church adorations, thanksgivings, supplications, placations, and satisfactions of infinite value, which Christ the Lord offered to God the Father for us. - Moreover, since in the treasury of the Church there are the merits of Christ, in the same treasury there are the merits which proceed from the sacrifice of the cross; but the sacrifice of the Mass is the renewal of the sacrifice of the cross; therefore all the effects which the sacrifice of the Mass can produce are contained in the treasury of the Church and in reality are applied from them by the supreme pontiff through condonation according to the intention of those who had asked for the Masses.

4. Obligation by reason of benefice.

195. By benefice is understood a simple benefice or chaplaincy, which imposes on the beneficed cleric the obligation from a pious foundation of celebrating Mass daily or yearly on certain days. These obligations arising from foundations are customarily called "perpetual burdens of Masses." The intention of founders is directed either to this, that a certain number of Masses be celebrated according to their intention, or to this, that Masses be said in a certain place, by which an occasion of hearing Mass may be furnished to the people.

1. The obligation of justice, to which the beneficed cleric is bound to satisfy, refers not only to the Masses themselves to be celebrated in a determinate number, but also to other adjuncts prescribed by the founder, namely to the species of the Mass (read or sung), to the place, to the time, etc., if the founder designated these things for a grave cause.

2. The beneficed cleric is not bound to satisfy the obligation of celebrating himself personally, unless this is required by express or equivalent words. But if he himself must celebrate, the obligation is grave, which nevertheless admits smallness of matter, so that he sins gravely if without an excusing cause he rather often does not celebrate himself.

3. The application of the Masses, where the founder has expressly established nothing concerning it, must be made according to the presumed intention of the founder. And indeed the Masses are rightly presumed to be applied to the soul of the founder when the founder simply imposes the burden of celebrating Masses; but when he prescribes that a certain number of Masses to be celebrated be applied to himself, he is judged to have left the application of the others free.

4. If a beneficed cleric who has the burden of a daily Mass does not have to celebrate himself personally, he can licitly omit none, but must see to it that the Mass be said by another when he himself does not celebrate. But if he himself is personally bound to celebrate daily, he can sometimes from a just cause omit a Mass, and he is not bound to supply it through another.¹ Causes of this kind are:

a. Illness; if, however, the illness is not brief but long lasting, he must celebrate through another, even with a stipend conferred, if there is need.

But a brief illness seems to some to be one which does not exceed fifteen days, to others one which does not exceed a month, to others one which does not exceed two months. Even this last opinion seemed probable to some,² but contrary decrees are present, from which he is bound to supply through another if the illness lasts beyond fifteen days,³ except in the case in which the beneficed cleric on account of illness had become entirely incapable and had nothing from which he might live from elsewhere, and had been ordained to the title of the benefice.⁴

b. Religion; therefore he can, because of a defect of devotion or disposition, and hence for the sake of humility and reverence, omit celebration once in a month.

c. A reasonable impediment; therefore he can omit Mass by reason of a journey or for making exercises; indeed authors permit that sometimes (five or six times in a year) he apply for himself or for his own. But it is not licit, when he celebrates for another, to accept a stipend, because from the foundation he has already received a stipend.

5. A beneficed cleric who must celebrate Mass in a determinate church, at a determinate altar, at a certain hour, sins gravely if he rather often (more than once and again in a month) without a just cause does not observe these dispositions of the founder, provided the founder determined them for a grave cause still enduring, e.g., for the convenience of the people, for the special cult of some saint, etc.

a. In dispositions of the founder of this kind a bishop can dispense for a time from a just cause, but in perpetuity the Holy See alone can dispense.

b. A beneficed cleric who from foundation is bound to celebrate on feast days at a determinate altar or in a determinate church can, on feasts afterward abrogated by the Church, celebrate in another church or at another altar, if the end of the foundation is that an occasion of hearing the sacred rite be furnished to the people.⁵

c. A beneficed cleric who from foundation is bound to apply for the founder on individual feast days is bound to this also on suppressed feasts.⁶

5. Obligation by reason of obedience.

¹ S. C. C., 18 Sept. 1683.

² Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 333.

³ S. C. C., 4 June 1689 and 17 Nov. 1695.

⁴ S. C. C., 14 Apr. 1655.

⁵ S. C. Ep. et Reg., 1 Mar. 1872.

⁶ S. C. Ep. et Reg., 15 Dec. 1836.

196. 1. Both the Council of Trent¹ and the Code of Canon Law² in almost the same words command bishops and religious superiors to take care that priests subject to them offer the most holy sacrifice of the Mass at least on individual Sundays and other feasts of precept; priests subject to them, if anywhere the superiors have given such a precept, are bound to obey.

2. That secular prelates, i.e., the supreme pontiff and the bishop, can of themselves command priests subject to them not only the celebration of Mass but also its application is certain, and the contrary opinion of some rests on a false foundation, namely that the Church cannot command internal acts; nevertheless superiors who are not religious rarely use this power, because priests undergo temporal damage by the fact that they are deprived of the stipend of Masses.

The conventual Mass, (if several must be celebrated, only one) must by ecclesiastical law be applied daily for benefactors in general.³ Religious indeed are not bound by common law, but for the most part by statute of the order, to make this application. The conventual Mass is called the Mass which is to be sung in cathedral and collegiate churches and in churches of regulars of either sex, in which the canonical office is performed in choir; therefore those who are not bound to choir do not have a conventual Mass.

3. Regular superiors, however, are accustomed to command the application of Mass to their subjects under diverse titles: and indeed from justice, where the stipends of Masses are accepted by superiors under this agreement, that they see to it that these are paid off through subjects; or from obedience, where either by force of the dominative power by which they have power over subjects they themselves enjoin the application of Mass, or by force of constitutions they prescribe Masses which are exacted by these for a certain intention.

a. Therefore subject religious priests are bound, whether from justice or from obedience, to apply the sacrifice of the Mass according to the intention prescribed by superiors. If a subject religious acts against the precept of the superior, he indeed validly applies to another intention, yet illicitly; and if he was bound from justice to offer, without doubt he sins gravely; otherwise he sins gravely or lightly or in no way against obedience according as the superior intended to oblige the subjects under grave sin or under light sin or not at all under sin. Constitutions of orders enjoining Masses generally do not oblige under sin.⁴

b. The precept of a superior enjoining the sacrifice of the Mass does not extend beyond the end intended by the superior. Therefore he who from obedience alone, i.e., from the precept of a superior or from statute of the order, is bound to perform the sacred rite, can apply to himself or to others the remaining fruits which do not directly contribute to the prescribed end. Thus, if Mass is exacted for a sick man to obtain his health, the priest can apply the other fruits besides the impetratory fruit; and if Mass is exacted in thanksgiving, he can apply at least the satisfactory fruit at will.

6. Obligation by reason of promise.

¹ Sess. 23, c. 14, De reform.

² Cn. 805.

³ Thus Benedict XIV establishes, const. Cum semper alia, 10 Aug. 1754.

⁴ Cf. S. C. de Relig., 3 May 1914.

197. 1. He who seriously and with the mind of obliging himself promises that he will offer the sacrifice of the Mass for someone, once the promise has been accepted by the other, is ordinarily bound from fidelity to apply the Mass for him. Yet for the most part promises of this kind are not made seriously and with the mind of obliging oneself, but show only a benevolent proposal; wherefore they rarely induce a true obligation. Therefore all things depend on the intention of the one promising.

2. The obligation from fidelity is ordinarily only light, even in a grave matter. Therefore he who truly promised one or several sacred rites to another and omits to apply them does not sin gravely, unless he expressly intended to oblige himself under grave sin, or took upon himself the burden of one who was bound under grave sin to celebrate. But if a true promise has not intervened, the omission of celebration is no sin.

He who is bound to perform the sacred rite from a liberal promise satisfies the obligation if he applies only the promised or requested fruit; but he can reserve the remaining fruits to himself or to another. For a liberal promise must be interpreted so that it is as little burdensome as possible to the one promising. For example, he who promised to one person a sacred rite in thanksgiving for a benefit received, to another for obtaining health, to a third for a deceased friend, satisfies the threefold promise by one sacred rite.¹

¹ Cf. Sporer-Bierbaum, III, pr. 8, n. 417, who followed Gobat, Experient. theol., tr. 3, n. 144; Lugo, disp. 19, n. 193.