Article II. On the Acceptance of Stipends and on the Obligation Arising from It

I. Acceptance of stipends. 1. It is lawful for no one to receive so many burdens of Masses to be celebrated by himself that he cannot satisfy them within a year - understand: from the day the obligation was undertaken - (canon 835), whether because the number offered exceeds the days of the year, or because the priest has already undertaken so many burdens that he cannot fulfill new ones within a year. The decree Ut debita contained the same disposition, with this addition: "yet always preserving the contrary will of those offering"; since this addition has been omitted in the Code, the liberty seems more restricted. Nor, however, should the new law be taken in such a way that, for example, it would be considered illicit to receive a stipend for twelve anniversary Masses.

2. In churches in which, on account of the peculiar devotion of the faithful, alms for Masses flow in such abundance that all the Masses cannot be celebrated there in due time, the faithful are to be warned, by a notice placed in a conspicuous and obvious place, that the Masses offered will be celebrated either there, when this can conveniently be done, or elsewhere (canon 836).

II. The obligation arising from a stipend regards both the celebration and application according to the intention of the one giving the stipend, and the circumstances intended by him, and the time determined either by him or by the Church. It is, moreover, an obligation of justice; nor does it stand in the way of this obligation that the one giving the stipend is ignorant of the norms established by the Church concerning time. It suffices that he intends the Mass as it is to be said according to the Church; but the priest, by accepting the stipend, tacitly binds himself to the norms established by the Church.

1. Celebration and application according to the intention of the one giving the stipend is imposed principally, and indeed for each individual stipend. Hence canon 828: "There are to be celebrated and applied as many Masses as there have been stipends, even small ones, given and accepted." Moreover, the omission of even only one Mass is certainly grave if the matter of the stipend with respect to the giver is grave, and there is not question of a large number of Masses to be celebrated for the same intention.

It is disputed, first, whether the omission of one Mass to be celebrated because of a stipend whose matter is light is grave. Several deny it; but with St. Alphonsus (VI, 317, q. 3) and others we affirm it. For an obligation owed from justice is grave if there is question of a grave thing, such as a Mass is. But that he who is deprived of the good of the Mass can obtain another Mass with a small stipend in no way prevents the one who is bound from justice to furnish a grave good from being bound under grave sin to do this.

It is disputed, second, whether the omission of one Mass is grave if there is question of a large number of Masses to be celebrated for the same intention. But the argument alleged above seems also to support the opinion which teaches that the omission is grave in this case too.

It is disputed, third, whether one who has received a small stipend is bound under grave sin to restore it in the case in which he can neither say the Mass himself nor take care that it be said by another, for he is bound to these things. Now this seems altogether to be denied, since it does not appear that the obligation of restoring a light thing is grave.

2. Due circumstances. On this point, first let canon 833 be noted: The offerer is presumed to have asked only for the application of the Mass; if, however, the offerer expressly determined that certain circumstances were to be observed in the celebration of the Mass, the priest, accepting the alms, must stand by his will. These points are especially to be noted:

a) The circumstance of place. Founded Masses must be celebrated in the place designated by the founder. It would be a grave sin often and without just cause to depart from this rule (St. Alphonsus, VI, 329). Nevertheless the beneficiary is not bound personally to celebrate the Masses, unless the founder expressly established this (St. Alphonsus, VI, 330). Moreover, the bishop can, by interpreting the will of the founder, permit by way of dispensation that for a just cause the Mass be celebrated in another place (St. Alphonsus, VI, 329).

As regards manual Masses, the circumstance of place must be observed under grave sin if, considering the circumstances, the place must be judged to pertain to the substance of the obligation, as easily happens if there is question of a nuptial Mass, a funeral Mass, or a Mass to be celebrated before a miraculous image. If the assigned place does not pertain to the substance of the obligation, neglect of it is light, and for a just cause not foreseen it becomes lawful.

b) The circumstance of a privileged altar. Concerning this, note:

alpha) One who is bound to celebrate at a privileged altar does not satisfy by applying another plenary indulgence to the deceased.¹

beta) A priest having the personal privilege of a privileged altar satisfies, even though he celebrates at an altar that is not privileged.²

gamma) The quality of a Requiem Mass, feria, or vigil, and likewise the addition of the prayer for the deceased, is no longer required for the value of the indulgence.³

delta) One who has not satisfied the circumstance of a privileged altar is bound to compensation, for example to applying another plenary indulgence to the soul of the deceased; he can accomplish this, for example, by saying the prayer En ego, etc. (St. Alphonsus, VI, 329).

c) The circumstance of the quality of the Mass - for example, of a Requiem or votive Mass - if it is expressly determined,⁴ must be observed under venial sin, but not under grave sin, because there is no question of the substance, but only of an accessory of the contract. But if the rubrics prohibit the quality of the Mass from being observed, generally, from the presumed consent of the one giving the stipend, the obligation is satisfied by another Mass. It is more advisable, however, that if it can conveniently be done, the requested Mass be said on another day.⁵ If the priest foresees that the requested quality of the Mass cannot be observed on the assigned day, the offerer should be forewarned.

d) The circumstance of Gregorian Masses entails that thirty Masses be celebrated for the same deceased person (by one priest or by several priests), and this through thirty uninterrupted days. Moreover, one who voluntarily interrupted the series is bound to begin it anew; if someone did this involuntarily, it suffices that he complete the number and in some way compensate the detriment, for example by applying a plenary indulgence.

¹ Sacred Congregation of Indulgences, 2 May 1852; 24 July 1885 (Acta Sanctae Sedis, vol. 18, p. 94).

² Sacred Congregation of Indulgences, 15 March 1852.

³ Holy Office, 19 February 1913 (Acta Apostolicae Sedis 1913, p. 122).

⁴ The quality of the Mass is expressly determined if a Mass of Requiem or a votive Mass, for example of St. Gerard, is requested; but not if it is requested for a certain intention. It is disputed whether or not it is sufficiently determined if a Mass is requested for a deceased person, or in honor of St. Gerard, or for a living person. Most deny it; indeed they rightly judge that generally only the application is intended, and in no way the quality of the Mass. Others say otherwise, but the response of the Sacred Congregation of Rites (3 March 1761, n. 2461, ad VII), on which they rely, does not settle our question when rightly posed. For the Sacred Congregation responded: "On days on which private votive Masses or Masses of the dead can be said, a priest bound to them by reason of a foundation or an accepted manual stipend does not satisfy his own obligation by saying the Mass of the occurring day; for the expressed will of testators or petitioners, provided it is reasonable, must be fulfilled." But we ask when he is bound to the quality of the Mass.

⁵ Cf. Sacred Congregation of Rites, 30 June 1896, n. 3922, General Decree, § IV, n. 3; 13 June 1899, n. 4031, ad IV.

3. Due time. Founded Masses and Masses after the manner of manual Masses must be celebrated on the day and at the hour designated by the founder. It would be a grave sin often and without just cause to depart from this rule (St. Alphonsus, VI, 329). Nevertheless the bishop can, by interpreting the will of the founder, permit by way of dispensation that for a just cause the Mass be celebrated on another day or at another hour (St. Alphonsus, VI, 329).

As regards manual Masses, receive these points:

a) If the offerer has expressly assigned a time, the Masses must absolutely be celebrated at that time (canon 834, § 1). A lengthy delay is a grave sin; likewise a slight delay is grave if it is such that a Mass requested for an instant necessity is not said in good time, according to what is to be said under c.

b) If the offerer has expressly left the time to the judgment of the priest, the priest will be able to celebrate them at the time which is more pleasing to himself, with the prescription of canon 835 remaining firm (canon 834, § 3); compare that canon with n. 219.

c) If the offerer has expressly assigned no time for the celebration of manual Masses:

alpha) Masses offered for an urgent cause must be celebrated as soon as possible within the useful time (canon 834, § 2, 1). Neglect of the useful time is gravely illicit and carries with it the obligation of restoring the stipend.

beta) In other cases the Masses must be celebrated within a moderate time, according to the greater or smaller number of Masses (canon 834, § 2, 2). In this matter, the decree Ut debita can be taken as a norm; it established that "the useful time for fulfilling obligations of manual Masses is one month for one Mass, six months for one hundred Masses, and another longer or shorter space of time more or less, according to the greater or smaller number of Masses" (n. 2).¹ Besides, the Sacred Congregation of the Council responded that the prescribed terms are to be understood separately with regard to each one who offers a stipend, not cumulatively with regard to all who offer. For the rest, a delay greater than is just, such as by force of natural law seems to be one which exceeds the time assigned above, is gravely or lightly illicit, according as it is notable or light. Moreover, a delay longer than a month beyond the legitimate time, and indeed even a shorter delay if there is question of the recently deceased, seems notable. Finally, it is equitable that some number from the Masses for the recently deceased be celebrated as quickly as possible (St. Alphonsus, VI, 317, question 2).

¹ As regards intermediate numbers, the Sacred Congregation of the Council responded on 27 February 1905: "the matter is left to the discreet judgment and conscience of priests according to the decree and the rules handed down by approved doctors." Hence these can be established:

III. Cessation of the obligation. Although the alms for Masses already received have perished without the fault of the one who is burdened with celebrating, the obligation does not cease (canon 829). The reason is clear: for the fact that the priest is deprived of his own thing, that is, of the stipend received, does not deprive another of the right, received and perfected through the handing over of the stipend, that Mass be applied to his intention. Nevertheless, one who has lost the alms, for example, can take care that another celebrate the Mass for a smaller stipend.