Question — Noldin, Summa of Moral Theology
Question First. On the Sanctification of Feast Days
260. Origin of the precept. The precept of sanctifying feast days is partly natural, partly divine, partly ecclesiastical: natural, insofar as it commands that some time be assigned to divine worship, not only private but also public; divine, insofar as it commands that on one day of each week, in praise of the Creator, there be cessation from every work; but ecclesiastical, insofar as it determines certain days and the mode of worshiping God. Therefore the Church in this matter has determined natural and divine right more accurately.
a. The precept of sanctifying feast days, as it is now observed in the Church, contains several elements: alpha. that one day of each week must be sanctified; beta. that this day is not, as in the Old Testament, the last day of the week, the sabbath, but ought to be the first, the Lord's day; gamma. that the day is to be understood as a space of twenty-four hours and that it is to be computed from midnight to midnight; delta. that on feast days certain acts of religion are prescribed for the worship of God, but certain works, as contrary to religious rest, are prohibited.
b. Concerning the ecclesiastical origin of this precept, so far as the third and fourth element are concerned, there is no doubt; concerning the origin of the precept as to the first and second element, some teach that each, namely both that one day in any week must be sanctified and that the Lord's day must be sanctified in place of the sabbath, is of divine law;1 others, on the contrary, teach that by ecclesiastical law not only was the Lord's day substituted for the sabbath, but also by the same law one day in the week is to be sanctified;2 finally others teach that one day of each week is to be sanctified by divine law, but that the Lord's day was destined for this end by ecclesiastical or rather apostolic law.3 And indeed God Himself instituted the division of time into weeks and commanded that the seventh day of each week be assigned to divine worship.4 Christ the Lord did not abrogate this precept, but willed it renewed for the whole Christian age, power having been granted to the apostles of substituting the Lord's day for the sabbath and of determining the mode by which that day was to be sanctified in praise of the Creator and Savior.
c. From these things it is inferred how far the power extends which belongs to the Church of dispensing in this precept, namely that she can change it and dispense in it insofar as it is ecclesiastical; but that she cannot establish that no day be deputed to divine worship, nor that the division of time into weeks and the sanctification of one day of each week be abrogated, nor finally that those works be licit which, by the common judgment of men, would destroy the end of the precept, namely religious rest.
1 Sporer-Bierbaum, tract. 3, n. 484.
2 Suarez, De religione, tract. 2, l. 2, c. 4, n. 5.
3 Fr. Schmid, Worin grundet die Pflicht der Sonntagsruhe? (Quartalschrift. Linz, 1900), p. 12 ff.; Die Gewalt der Kirche uber die Sonntagsruhe (Zeitschrift fur kath. Theologie XXV [1901]), p. 436 ff.
4 Gen. 2:2-3, compared with Ex. 20:8-11.
261. On the precept itself. 1. The precept of sanctifying feasts obligates under grave obligation1 all the faithful in possession of reason, therefore after the completion of the seventh year: for the matter and end of the precept are grave; therefore also by the universal use of the Church it is held as grave; yet it admits smallness of matter.
a. Feast days which are to be sanctified must be computed from midnight to midnight, as the use of the Roman Church bears.
b. Feasts formerly to be observed by common law from the constitution Universa of Urban VIII,2 besides Sundays, were thirty-six;3 but today several of them (in diverse regions in diverse number) have been abrogated, so that, for example, in France and Belgium, besides those which are fixed to Sunday, only four are celebrated, and in North America only six.
- On Sundays and feasts the Church obligates the faithful to two things: a. to hearing Mass, because God as the first principle of all things is to be worshiped by sacrifice; but all sacrifices in the new law have been reduced to the sacrifice of the Mass; b. to abstaining from servile works, because the principal end of this precept is that man attend to divine things; but servile works plainly impede application to divine things.
a. This precept is not intimated in canon law, but is supposed;4 but it is established from universal custom, which Christian doctrine everywhere declares in catechisms.
b. Priests satisfy the precept by celebration; but those who do not celebrate are held to hear Mass.
- Beyond these two things, nothing else is expressly commanded by the ecclesiastical precept of sanctifying feasts, nor has anything else been introduced by legitimate custom. Wherefore:
a. The faithful are not held to hear a sermon or catechesis, unless the natural precept obligates them to this, namely if someone is not sufficiently instructed in those things which he must explicitly know and believe, and either does not wish or is not able to employ another means of learning them.
Nor from the fact that parish priests, by precept of the Church, are held to preach on Sundays and feasts,5 does it follow that the faithful are obligated to hear the sermon: for parish priests are held to furnish the occasion so that the faithful, for whom this is necessary or useful, can be instructed in Christian doctrine. But hearing a sermon is so salutary and profitable that the fathers of the Council of Trent (loc. cit.) said that the faithful are held, if they conveniently can, to hearing the word of God.
b. They are not held to assist at vespers or evening devotions, not even under light obligation, unless accidentally scandal arises from the omission.
c. They are not held to worship God by certain internal acts, such as acts of faith, hope, and charity: for not internal but external worship of God is enjoined upon us by this precept; moreover, the sanctification of the soul is the end of the precept, which does not fall under the precept.
1 Cf. proposition 52 condemned by Innocent XI: The precept of observing feasts does not obligate under mortal sin, scandal being set aside, if contempt is absent.
2 Const. Universa of Urban VIII, 13 Sept. 1642.
3 Cf. De sacramentis^9, n. 181.
4 C. Omnes 62, De consecr., d. 1; C. Missas 64, De consecr., d. 1.