Article I: Various Sources of Obligation

— 1. The Priestly Order Itself, from the present discipline, obliges all priests to celebrate the sacred rite several times a year (c. 805); and the bishop or religious Superior must take care that, at least on individual Sundays and feasts of precept, they perform divine things (c. 805).

From the present discipline, I say, which by a sufficiently common opinion of classic doctors has been introduced or manifested. And they hold that there is a grave obligation of sacrificing three or four times a year.

But with positive law set aside, it will be lawful with St. Bonaventure, in 4 Sent., d. 12, p. 2, art. 2, q. 1; Lugo, Euchar., d. 20, n. 2; d'Annibale, Summula, III, 163 (10); Ballerini-Palmieri, IV, 1005, 1006, to deny the efficacy of the demonstration by which St. Thomas, 3 p., q. 82, art. 10, Suarez, Vasquez, Laymann, and St. Alphonsus, l. 6, n. 313, wish to derive that obligation from natural or divine law. For in so great a number of priests, complete abstinence of some does not take away in the Church of God that number of Masses which is equal to worshipping God duly and impetrating graces; the cited place, 2 Corinthians 6:1, "We exhort you not to receive the grace of God in vain," is not to the point, since it treats of vocation to faith and to salvation, nor do the words sound as a precept. Besides, St. Jerome never celebrated Mass, nor was he alone in abstaining from celebration; St. Ignatius himself omitted celebration for a whole first year. But, as is evident, today the pious use of daily celebration is very much to be commended.

— 2. Precept of a Superior. Let us distinguish celebration and application of Mass.

Celebration, as long as he judges it commanded by necessity of the Church, the proper territorial Ordinary does not indeed seem able to prescribe directly, but from c. 128 he is permitted to impose on a priest not impeded a function with which this obligation is joined.

The application of Mass itself can be commanded to all by the Supreme Pontiff; and to religious subjects, from the manner in which the vow of obedience is customarily understood, by the competent Superior. Indeed Lehmkuhl, II, 283, thinks that the obligation of justice of celebrating for stipends, which he himself has undertaken for the community, can be transferred by the Superior to individual professed persons. It is controverted whether or not a bishop or Superior, who can command by jurisdiction alone, has power for commanding application. R. P. Cappello, op. c., I, 689, admits the power.

Yet a precept of this kind is opposed to received usage. Cf. Lehmkuhl, II, 282; Wernz, III, 583.

Recently, however, on May 8, 1920, in the Vigevano case, the Sacred Congregation of the Council judged that, by force of an apostolic indult by which a faculty is made to a bishop "of dispensing priests exercising care of souls from the obligation of sacrificing the Mass for the people, of permitting priests repeating Mass on a feast day that they may have power to apply the second Mass according to the mind of the Ordinary himself, for the effect of spending the alms in favor of the Seminary," by force, I say, of such an indult, a right belongs to the bishop of prescribing the application of which there is question, so that, this episcopal prescription having been made, it is no longer free to the pastor on those days to sacrifice for the people, nor to the priest binating to celebrate the other Mass gratis for another intention (A. A. S., XII [1920], p. 536 ff.).

But application of Mass can be prescribed under grave sin (St. Alphonsus, l. 6, n. 317).

— 3. Care of Souls. After the sacrifice of Holy Mass was instituted, by divine-natural law pastors of souls, whether secular or regular, must sometimes sacrifice for their sheep. This is more of absolutely divine law in bishops, since the very function is of divine institution. Cf. the dissertation of Tarquini, J. S. S., I, 389 ff. In what way the Church has now defined the obligation of bishops, quasi-bishops, pastors, and quasi-pastors, we saw above, nn. 87, 89-92, 94-96.

Yet concerning the strict obligation of regular Superiors it is not certain. Cf. Cappello, op. c., I, 640.

— 4. Burden of a Benefice. A beneficiary must, under mortal sin and the debt of compensating, celebrate as many Masses, whether by himself or through another, according as the mind of the founder forbids or permits this option, as the letters of foundation require.

If the chaplaincy⁽¹⁾ was manual, or consists in Masses not properly founded but to be cared for by a private person, and for each Mass a certain alms is handed over, this whole alms is owed to the celebrant. But if individual stipends do not correspond to individual Masses, it is enough that the beneficiary provide a congruent alms to the celebrant, unless something else has been provided in the tables of foundation.

Without an apostolic indult, it is not lawful for a bishop to reduce burdens of Masses because the assigned revenues are unequal to the tax to be paid today, unless the founder himself has made this faculty to the bishop.

But if the revenues themselves have entirely failed, without fault of the beneficiary, the beneficiary, from the common opinion, is no longer held by celebration.

But if they have decreased: either a competent alms was assigned to each Mass, to be estimated from the time of the foundation, as if he said: "I bequeath such an olive grove to the fabric of the church with the burden that from the annual fruits one hundred stipends of two francs be taken for as many Masses"; then according to the increase or diminution of revenues, the number of Masses will have to be increased or diminished; or the testator defined the number of Masses absolutely; then some permitted that, from the mind of the testator, the beneficiary diminish the number of Masses pro rata, if from the revenues he no longer drew that tax which from the ancient computation was congruent. Others opposed this opinion, and St. Alphonsus did not dare to judge concerning its probability. But now, from c. 1517, §2, recourse must be had to the Holy See for that reduction of Masses.

Permission of the Holy See, which is not denied, is also to be sought so that one can use the Italian law which, with a certain tribute paid, makes an abundance of freeing goods of a chaplaincy from pious burdens, while nevertheless the obligation of fulfilling these burdens remains.

He who by reason of a benefice is held to daily celebration must also, unless a diverse intention of the founder is certain, apply Mass for the founder.

A beneficiary impeded by an illness not prolonged need not substitute another for himself or compensate omitted Masses: for the obligation is to be interpreted in a human manner; and honorable masters themselves condone these impediments to servants. But an illness of fifteen days, indeed of one or another month, is not judged prolonged, as Lugo probably estimates, Euchar., d. 21, n. 49, according to the testimony of St. Alphonsus, VI, 333. But other impediments, even just ones, of business ought not to harm the founder. Wherefore the beneficiary must satisfy through another the burden which he himself cannot fulfill, or afterward supply it himself, at least when the burden is real. For if the burden was personal of daily celebration, he can omit it as often as a reasonable cause occurs (Sacred Congregation of the Council, September 18, 1683). The common opinion also permits the same one, unless the tables of foundation prescribe stricter things, to offer the sacred rite four or six times a year for himself or for persons joined by blood or friendship, gratis.

⁽¹⁾ By the name of chaplaincy is designated a simple benefice which, because of the burden of celebrating Mass, is judged to give care of a chapel or oratory.

— 5. Voluntary Promise. a) This can be a vow; its matter is judged grave. It can be a gratuitous promise: unless the one promising expressly bound himself under grave guilt, the obligation is judged to be of fidelity, and therefore light. Finally it can be onerous, or from contract. Here, from c. 826 itself, manual stipends, stipends after the manner of manual, and founded stipends, or founded Masses, are to be distinguished.

"Stipends which are offered by the faithful for Masses, whether from their own devotion, or, as it were, into the hand, or from an obligation even perpetual made by a testator to his own heirs, are called manual" (c. 826, §1). Stipends of founded Masses which are handed to other priests are called after the manner of manual, whether by law or from an indult of the Holy See, because they cannot be applied in their own place or by those who would have had to apply them according to the tables of foundation (c. 826, §2). Finally, stipends which are received from the revenues of foundations are called founded.

By what reason the use of demanding a stipend for Masses is pure from all simony, we saw in the prior special part, where there is question of the virtue of religion and the sin of simony.

The breadth of the matter seems to demand that we treat these arguments in distinct articles.