§ I. On Presence of Body

I Say. For Mass to be heard rightly there is required a moral and continuous presence of body: moral, insofar as someone ought to be so present where the Sacred Rite is taking place that he can be said to be one from the number of those assisting and offering the Sacrifice; but continuous, insofar as someone ought to persevere from the beginning to the end of Mass, so that he sins gravely if he omits a notable part of it, and venially if he omits a small part.

Question 1. Is it required for such moral presence that someone see the priest or hear his words?

Response. Not at all, negatively; for he is truly said to be one of those assisting who distinguishes the parts of the Mass by the sound of the bell, by the chant of the choir, etc., even if he is behind a column or wall, or also stands outside the church itself in which the crowd of the faithful cannot be contained, provided, however, that he is not very far from the door. But how great this distance can be, although to Lugo a space of thirty paces does not seem too great, must be determined from the circumstances of places. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 312. - Lugo, de Euchar., disp. 22, n. 21. - Baller., note (a), p. 334.

Question 2. What omission in Mass is to be regarded as grave or light?

Response. It cannot easily be determined; for although, according to all, a third part of the Mass is notable, nevertheless it is not clear what the third part is, since a notable part ought to be judged not only from duration, but also from dignity. Yet according to the common opinion these things can be established:

1st. It is certainly light to omit everything up to the Epistle exclusively, and more probably also inclusively, indeed probably also up to the Gospel inclusively, although St. Alphonsus regards the opposite opinion as more probable. And this must be said even if the Creed is omitted, because the Creed is not a regular part. Hence one present at Mass while the priest greets the people before he reads that little verse which formerly was called the antiphon, and now is called the offertory, can be excused from mortal sin. The reason is that the things which precede do not pertain to the sacrifice, but are remote preparation for it. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 310.

2nd. It is grave, according to all, to omit everything before the Gospel and at the same time everything after communion; but not to omit only those things which follow communion, indeed not even to omit everything before the Epistle and everything after communion. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 310. - Lacroix, n. 666.

3rd. Grave is the omission of the canon from the consecration up to the Pater exclusively, because it is a notable part by duration and dignity. But the omission of the offertory is reputed light, taking this word according to its twofold acceptance, namely for the recitation of the little verse which in the Missal is placed after the Gospel, and for the oblation of bread and wine. But the Gospel of St. John at the end is probably not part of the Mass, because before it the people are already dismissed by the blessing.

4th. It is grave to omit the consecration and communion; indeed also one consecration alone, because it is the most dignified part, in which, at least principally, the nature of the sacrifice consists. Indeed it is more probably grave to be absent from one consecration only, because the essence of the sacrifice more probably consists in each consecration. - But whether to pass by communion alone is grave is controverted; the affirmative opinion is more probable to St. Alphonsus, because he judges that the essence of the sacrifice also consists in communion. But the more common and truer opinion places it in consecration alone. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, Hom. Ap., n. 33.

Question 3. Does he satisfy the precept who hears two halves of Masses from diverse priests, either simultaneously or successively?

Response. Negatively, if he hears simultaneously. The reason is deduced from the common interpretation of the law, and is confirmed by proposition 53 condemned by Innocent XI, which sounds thus: "He satisfies the precept of the Church concerning hearing the Sacred Rite who hears two parts of it, even four at the same time from diverse celebrants." But if he hears successively, again one must deny it if the consecration and communion are not in the same part; because the Church commands the faithful to be present at an entire and perfect sacrifice. But that is not had, at least as regards integrity, unless both consecration and communion come together in the same Mass. Otherwise, however, one must say probably, if the consecration and communion are found in the same part of the Mass, because then the entire nature of the sacrifice is had in the same part. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 311; and Hom. Ap., n. 34.

Question 4. Must one hear the remainder, who comes after the consecration?

Response. Negatively, probably, because the essence of the sacrifice is now lacking; therefore the obligation of assisting at that Mass ceases, since the precept cannot be fulfilled by this means. But he who comes before the consecration is held to the remaining part of the Mass for the contrary reason, and by the common authority of the Doctors. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 310. - Baller., note (b), p. 336.¹

¹ Cf. Addenda, p. 1144, n. 116.