The Obligation of Applying Mass

Priests may be bound to say Mass for a definite intention on various grounds. Those who hold a benefice are frequently obliged to say Mass, either every day or on certain fixed days, for the intentions prescribed by the founder of the benefice. The conventual Mass, which should be said every day in cathedral, collegiate, and conventual churches, ought to be applied for the benefit of the souls of benefactors. The Council of Trent¹ declares that by divine precept it is enjoined on all who have the cure of souls to offer sacrifice for their flock. Bishops, therefore, and regular prelates, who have the full cure of souls, are bound by divine law to say Mass for those committed to their charge. Parish priests are of ecclesiastical institution, and they have not the full cure of souls committed to them. How far their duties extend depends on ecclesiastical law. That law obliges them as well as bishops to say Mass for their flock every Sunday and holy day of obligation, even on those feast-days of obligation which have been suppressed. This obligation is at the same time real and personal. It is real in the sense that if for any reason a bishop or parish priest cannot fulfil it on any particular day, he is under the obligation of providing that it should be fulfilled by some other priest. It is personal in the sense that they must as far as possible fulfil it in person; but if a parish priest be lawfully absent from his parish, he may either apply Mass for his people in the place where he is, or have one applied in his parish by the priest who takes his place (Can. 466, sec. 5).

Quasi-parish priests are bound to offer Mass for their people on the more solemn feasts mentioned in Canon 306.

¹ Sess. xxiii, c. 1, de Ref.

The ecclesiastical superiors of priests may issue a command that Mass be applied for some special intention. When this is done the command must, of course, be obeyed by all whom it concerns. The matter of such a precept is certainly grave, and so there will be a serious obligation of complying with it, if the superior intended to issue a strict precept. This, however, is not always or necessarily the case; and in particular instances, if there is question of determining the gravity of an obligation arising from such a precept, the intention of the superior who gave it will have to be examined according to the ordinary rules of interpretation.

A priest may bind himself by promise to say Mass for a particular intention, and then he will be bound to say it either in justice, or at least out of fidelity, just as he is bound to fulfil his other promises.

Finally, priests are bound in justice to say Mass for the intention of those from whom they have received a stipend for the purpose. The stipend is not the price of the Mass, for this cannot be bought and sold without committing the grave sin of simony. The stipend is given to provide for the support of the priest, who in return undertakes to say Mass for the giver of the stipend. In the early Church the faithful used to bring bread and wine to the priests, who selected from what was offered enough for the sacrifice, and reserved the rest for their support. This was found to be inconvenient, and in course of time the faithful who wished Mass to be offered for their intention contributed a sum of money for the support of the priest. This method, after all, is in substance what St Paul alludes to: “ Know you not that they who work in the holy place eat the things that are of the holy place; and they that serve the altar partake with the altar ?”¹ Simony may, indeed, be committed in transactions concerned with the Mass and stipends, but such sordid practices should not be presumed to be of ordinary occurrence (Can. 824).

Although a priest who accepts a stipend for a Mass does not sell the Mass, yet he enters into a strict contract with the giver of the stipend, and binds himself in justice to apply the Mass for his intention. He will, therefore, commit a grave sin against justice if he fail to fulfil his obligation, and he must restore the stipend which he received, but which he has no title to keep. Not only is the priest who has accepted a stipend bound in justice to say a Mass, but justice also requires that he should observe all the conditions of the contract into which he entered concerning the quality of the Mass, the place, and the time of celebration.

The law of the Church on the matter may be stated as follows: According to the received and approved custom and practice of the Church, it is lawful for any priest who says and applies Mass to receive an alms or stipend for it.

But whenever a priest says Mass more than once in the day, if he has applied one Mass by a title of justice, except on Christmas Day, he cannot receive a stipend for another Mass on the same day, but he may receive some compensation due for some extrinsic reason.

It is never allowed to apply Mass for the intention of someone who will offer a stipend and ask for the application of a Mass but has not yet done so, and retain a stipend given afterwards for a Mass said beforehand. Nor is it allowed to receive a stipend for a Mass which is due in justice and applied by another title. Nor to receive a double stipend for the application of the same Mass. Nor to receive one stipend for the mere celebration of Mass, and another for the application of the same Mass, unless it is certain that one stipend was offered for the mere celebration of the Mass without its application.

Those are called manual stipends which are offered for Masses by the faithful, as it were, out of hand, whether in order to satisfy their own devotion or to fulfil an obligation imposed on them by the will of a testator even in perpetuity.

The stipends of funded Masses are said to be like manual Masses which cannot be applied in the proper place, or by those who ought to apply them according to the laws of the foundation to which they belong, and so by law or by an indult of the Holy See they have to be given to other priests to be satisfied.

Other stipends which are received from the revenue of foundations are called funded or foundation Masses.

Let all appearance even of trading or trafficking with stipends for Mass be altogether avoided.

As many Masses must be said and applied as stipends were given and accepted, however small they were.

The obligation does not cease even though the stipends already received for Mass have been lost without any fault on the part of him who was burdened with their celebration.

If anyone offers a sum of money for Mass stipends without indicating the number of Masses which he wishes to be said, let the number be computed according to the tax of the place where he lived, unless it must be lawfully presumed that his intention was different.

It belongs to the local Ordinary to determine the manual stipend for Masses in his diocese by a decree made in diocesan synod as far as possible; nor is it lawful for a priest to exact a larger sum.

Where there is no formal decree of the Ordinary on the point, let the custom of the diocese be observed.

Religious, even though they be exempt, ought to abide by the local Ordinary’s decree or the custom of the diocese in the matter of the manual stipend of Masses.

A priest may receive a larger stipend for the application of Mass if it is offered voluntarily, and also a less, unless the local Ordinary has forbidden it.

It is presumed that the offerer of a stipend asked only for the application of Mass, but if he expressly stipulated that any circumstances should be observed in the celebration of Mass, the priest who accepts the stipend should comply with the desire expressed.

If the time for the celebration of Masses was expressly determined by the offerer of the stipend, the Masses must by all means be celebrated at that time.

If the offerer expressly determined no time for the celebration of manual Masses— (1) Masses offered for an urgent intention must be offered at the time required by the circumstances and as soon as possible.

(2) In other cases the Masses must be offered within a reasonable time in proportion to the greater or less number of Masses. The decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, May 11, 1904, assigned one month from the time of receiving the stipend as the limit within which one Mass is to be said, six months as the limit for one hundred Masses, and a longer or shorter period for a greater or less number.

If the offerer expressly left the time of celebration to the judgement of the priest, the priest may say the Mass at what time he pleases, but no one is allowed to receive more stipends than he can satisfy in one year.

In churches in which, on account of the special devotion of the faithful, stipends for Mass are so abundant that all cannot be said there within the proper time, let the faithful be informed by a notice placed in an open and conspicuous place that the stipends offered will be satisfied either there, when it can be done conveniently, or elsewhere.

Let one who has Masses to be said by others distribute them as soon as may be, but the lawful time for their celebrating begins from the day on which the priest who has to say them received the same, unless the contrary is certain.

Those who have a number of Masses of which they can freely dispose may give them to priests on whom they can rely, provided that they know that they are unexceptionable, or are recommended by the testimony of their own Ordinary.

Those who have given Masses, which they have received from the faithful or which are entrusted to them, to others to be said by them, remain bound by their obligation until they receive notice that the stipends have been received and the obligation accepted.

One who sends manual stipends to others ought to send the whole sum which he has received, unless either the offerer expressly allows him to retain a portion, or it is certain that the excess above the diocesan tax was given out of personal considerations, In Masses which are like manual Masses, unless the intention of the founder forbids it, any excess may lawfully be retained, and it is sufficient to send only the manual stipend of the diocese in which the Mass is celebrated, if the large stipend takes the place of a part of the dowry of the benefice or pious foundation.

Each and all administrators of pious foundations or persons who are bound in any way to fulfil obligations of having Mass said, whether ecclesiastics or laymen, towards the end of each year must give the Masses which have not yet been said to their Ordinaries according to the method to be defined by them.

This period is to be interpreted in such a way that in the Masses like manual Masses the obligation of handing them over runs from the end of the year within which they ought to have been said; but in manual Masses after a year from the day of undertaking them, unless the offerer determined otherwise.

The right and the duty of seeing that Mass obligations be fulfilled belongs to the local Ordinary in secular churches; in the churches of religious it belongs to their superiors, Let rectors of churches and of other pious foundations, whether secular or religious, in which Mass stipends are wont to be received, have a special book in which they note the number of stipends for Mass received, the intention, the amount of the stipend, and the celebration of the Masses.

The Ordinaries are under the obligation at least every year of examining these books in person or by deputy.

Moreover, local Ordinaries and religious superiors who give Masses to their subjects or to others to be said should at once put down in order in a book the Masses which they have received with their stipends, and should take care, as far as they can, that the Masses be said as soon as possible.

Indeed, all priests, whether secular or religious, ought to note accurately what Mass intentions they have received and which they have satisfied (Can. 824-844).

¹ 1 Cor. ix. 13.

I. Christ imposed upon the college of the Apostles and of priests the precept of celebrating repeatedly. This is of faith from the Council of Trent,¹ which declared: "If anyone says that by those words: Do this in commemoration of me, Christ did not institute the Apostles priests, or did not ordain that they and other priests should offer His body and blood, let him be anathema."

II. Individual priests also are bound to celebrate repeatedly, according to canon 805: All priests are bound by the obligation of sacrificing several times a year; but let the bishop or religious superior take care that they do this sacred work at least on each Sunday and on other feasts of precept. It is said several times a year, that is, three or four times per year.

It is disputed whether the obligation of individuals to celebrate repeatedly is of divine law or only ecclesiastical law. Now most authors with St. Thomas (III, q. 82, a. 10) maintain divine law, because a true disorder seems to exist in the fact that one ordained for rendering so great honor to God and for providing so great utility to human beings frustrates such an end (St. Alphonsus, VI, 313; Examen Ordinandorum, n. 111).

III. One who can conveniently celebrate and does not celebrate because of sloth, according to several authors sins lightly, because a venial disorder is had in the fact that one ordained for celebrating neglects so great a good of God and human beings, which he can provide with such ease (St. Alphonsus, VI, 359). For the rest, the same things which commend daily Communion to the faithful persuade priests to daily celebration.

¹ Session 22, canon 2.

Those who have care of souls are bound by office either to celebrate or to take care that Mass be celebrated on those days on which the people committed to them are bound to hear Mass. Hence the Council of Trent says: "Let the bishop take care that those... who have had care of souls celebrate Mass as frequently as is sufficient to satisfy their office."¹

¹ Session 23, chapter 14, on reform.

I. The source of the obligation is divine right or law, as the Council of Trent expressly teaches.¹ Now bishops are bound by absolute or immediate divine law; namely, the Holy Spirit Himself placed them to rule the Church of God, so that they cannot be lacking in the organism of the Church. But to the office of ruling and feeding is annexed the obligation of applying. Pastors are bound by hypothetical or mediate divine law; namely, on the hypothesis that by the Supreme Pontiff or by the bishops they are called into a share of pastoral solicitude, or for ruling a part of the flock. Thus from the Constitution of Leo XIII In suprema.² From these things it is also explained why pastors obtain some moderation of the obligation more easily than bishops (St. Alphonsus, VI, 324, question 2).

¹ Session 23, chapter 1, on reform.

² 10 June 1882.

II. The subject and object of the obligation. 1. Bishops, after having taken possession of the see, with every excuse from scantiness of revenues or any other exception removed, must apply Mass for the people committed to them on all Sundays and other feast days of precept, even suppressed ones (canon 339, § 1).

a) The feast days on which application is prescribed, according to the declaration of the Pontifical Commission,¹ are to be taken according to the catalogue established by Urban VIII in the Constitution Universa,² and again promulgated by the Sacred Congregation of the Council,³ with the feast of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary added from the Constitution of Clement XI Commissi nobis,⁴ and by force of the cited canon. They are therefore: the Nativity of the Lord, Circumcision, Epiphany, Easter with the two following days, Ascension, Pentecost with the two following days, Trinity, Corpus Christi, Invention of the Holy Cross, Purification, Annunciation, Assumption, Nativity of the Blessed Virgin, Immaculate Conception, Dedication of St. Michael, Nativity of St. John the Baptist, all the Holy Apostles, St. Stephen, Holy Innocents, St. Lawrence, St. Sylvester, St. Joseph, St. Anne, All Saints, and the feast of one of the principal patrons in any kingdom or province, and likewise of another principal patron in any city, town, or village where it happens that these patrons are had and venerated. Moreover, if somewhere by concession of the Holy See a particular feast of precept is celebrated, on this feast too there is the obligation of applying for the people (canon 339, § 1).

There is dispute about the obligation on feast days which previously were of precept from particular law, but now have been suppressed by force of the Code. Now the obligation seems to be maintained, both because of a particular response issued,⁵ and because canon 466, § 1 generally declares that on feast days of precept, even suppressed ones, the obligation persists.

b) Although a bishop governs two or more dioceses equally principally united, or besides his own diocese has another or others in administration, nevertheless he satisfies the obligation by the celebration and application of one Mass for the whole people committed to him (canon 339, § 5).

As regards titular bishops, canon 348, § 2 states: It is fitting from charity, yet without obligation, that they sometimes apply the sacrifice of the Mass for their diocese.

2. A capitular vicar is bound in the same way as a bishop to apply Mass for the people (canon 440).

3. Vicars and prefects apostolic must apply the sacrifice of the Mass for the peoples committed to them at least on the solemnities of the Nativity of the Lord, Epiphany, Easter, Ascension, Pentecost, the Most Holy Body of Christ, the Immaculate Conception and Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, St. Joseph her spouse, the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, and All Saints (canon 306).

4. An apostolic administrator, if he has been constituted permanently, is bound to apply as a bishop; if he has been given for a time, he is not bound by the obligation, which burdens a bishop, of applying Mass for the people (canon 315).

5. Pastors,⁶ after having taken possession of the parish, are bound on the same days and by the same obligation as bishops to apply Mass for the people committed to them (canon 466, § 1). Nevertheless:

a) A pastor who perhaps governs several parishes equally principally united, or besides his own parish has another or others in administration, must apply only one Mass for the peoples committed to him on the prescribed days (canon 466, § 2). The same holds of a vicar-economus who governs several parishes during a vacancy.⁷ If, however, the matter concerns the feast of the patron of the place, the pastor who, besides his own parish, has another or several others in administration, is bound to apply Mass for the people not only on the feast day of the patron of his own parish, but also on the feasts of the patrons of the other parish or parishes, unless the patrons occur as to be honored on the same day, either because the same one is the patron, or because the feast of the patrons is celebrated on the same day from liturgical laws.⁸

b) The local Ordinary can for a just cause permit the pastor to apply Mass for the people on another day than the one on which he is bound by law (canon 466, § 3); this permission can also be granted habitually.

c) The pastor should celebrate the Mass to be applied for the people in the parish church, unless circumstances of things require or suggest that Mass be celebrated elsewhere (canon 466, § 4); for example if because of a special feast there is a concourse of the people in some chapel or succursal church within the limits of the parish. Likewise one who applies through another must per se take care that the other celebrate in the parish church.⁹

d) A solemn or sung Mass is not prescribed, but a private Mass suffices.¹⁰

6. Quasi-pastors are bound on the same days as vicars and prefects apostolic, under 3, to apply Mass for the people committed to them (canon 466, § 1).

7. A vicar-economus, constituted while the parish is vacant, is bound as a pastor (canon 473, § 1).

¹ 17 February 1918, ad II (Acta Apostolicae Sedis 1918, p. 170).

² 13 September 1642.

³ 28 December 1919 (Acta Apostolicae Sedis 1920, p. 42).

⁴ 6 December 1708.

⁵ In Il Monitore Ecclesiastico 1920, p. 72.

⁶ Who come under the name of pastor and quasi-pastor, see in the treatise on Matrimony.

⁷ Pontifical Commission, 14 July 1922, ad VI (Acta Apostolicae Sedis, p. 528).

⁸ Sacred Congregation of the Council, 12 November 1927 (Acta Apostolicae Sedis 1928, p. 84).

⁹ Sacred Congregation of the Council, 23 December 1872.

¹⁰ Sacred Congregation of Rites, 27 February 1847, n. 2939, ad IV; 22 July 1848, n. 2967.

III. A fuller explanation of the object of the obligation. 1. On the feast of the Nativity of the Lord, and if some feast of precept falls on a Sunday, it suffices that they apply one Mass for the people (canon 339, § 2). If a feast is transferred in such a way that on the day to which it is transferred not only is the office with the Mass of the transferred feast performed, but also the obligations of hearing Mass and abstaining from servile works are observed, the Mass for the people must be applied on the day to which it is transferred; otherwise on the day from which it is transferred (canon 339, § 3).

2. One who is bound by the obligation of applying must himself apply Mass personally (canon 339, § 4, compared with canons 306 and 466, § 1). Nevertheless, a legitimately absent pastor can apply Mass for the people either personally in the place where he is staying, or through the priest who takes his place in the parish (canon 466, § 5). If someone on the same day is urged by the burden of both Masses, namely for the people and conventual, let him celebrate and apply the latter personally, and the former through another or personally on the following day (canon 419, § 2).

3. A pastor legitimately absent, if he does not apply personally, and likewise one legitimately impeded from personally applying Mass for the people, should apply through another on the appointed days.

Legitimately impeding causes are: 1. physical or moral inability; 2. the obligation of celebrating conventual Mass, if the pastor is also a canon (canon 419, § 2). But the following do not legitimately impede: 1. the mere custom of applying through another;¹ 2. the custom of applying now personally, now through another, for example through a chaplain, if the latter celebrates solemn Mass;² 3. the liturgical precept which wills that the Mass for the people be conformed to the office. Hence if the external solemnity of some feast is transferred, and in the transfer a votive Mass is sung, the pastor cannot, so that he himself may celebrate that votive Mass, leave the application for the people to the chaplain or another; 4. the celebration of a funeral Mass, even with the corpse present.³

4. One who can apply neither personally nor through another on the appointed days should apply as soon as possible, either personally or through another, on another day (cited canon).

5. The real obligation, that is, either of applying for the people or of taking care that it be applied for them, is grave. The obligation of applying personally, at the fixed time, and, if the matter concerns a pastor, in the parish church, is grave from its genus, so that he would sin gravely who frequently neglected these things.

6. One who has not satisfied the obligation should as soon as possible apply for the people as many Masses as he omitted (canon 339, § 6, compared with canons 306 and 466, § 1).

7. One who applies Mass for the people in place of the pastor can receive a stipend for that Mass; but an impeded pastor is bound at his own expense to take care that it be applied for the people.

¹ Sacred Congregation of the Council, 22 September 1847.

² Sacred Congregation of the Council, 9 April 1881.

³ Sacred Congregation of the Council, 26 January 1771.

I. The celebration of Mass can be commanded by a competent superior. This is clear from what was said about the object of law and precept (vol. I, n. 117).

II. The application of Mass can be commanded as follows:

1. The Supreme Pontiff can certainly do this, insofar as he determines divine law, as if he prescribes that those having care of souls should sometimes celebrate for the people.

2. Religious superiors can do the same, at least by force of dominative power, with respect to their subjects, provided that the vow emitted in religion is so understood;¹ they can transfer to subjects the obligation of justice annexed to a stipend received (St. Alphonsus, VI, 317, question 4).

3. It is disputed whether ecclesiastical superiors who enjoy only the power of jurisdiction can do the same; likewise whether the superior of a religious institute can do the same by force of the same power. The Sacred Congregation of the Council, in the Vigevano case,² admits the affirmative opinion (cf. vol. I, n. 117).

III. One who has promised a Mass gratuitously is bound under venial sin, namely from fidelity, to stand by what was promised, unless he intended to bind himself under grave sin, or from justice (St. Alphonsus, VI, 317, question 4; vol. I, n. 864).

¹ Sacred Congregation of Religious, 3 May 1914.

² 8 May 1920 (Acta Apostolicae Sedis 1920, p. 536).

I. Notion and origin. A stipend is an offering, that is, money or a thing estimable by price, which someone offers to a priest under this burden: that the priest apply the special fruit of the Mass to his, that is, the offerer's, intention. Hence the contract constituted once the stipend has been accepted takes on the nature of the contract: I give that you may do (cf. canon 1544, § 2).

The most remote origin is found in the offerings which the faithful in antiquity, when they came together for performing sacred rites, brought to the altar within the Mass itself (at the Offertory), both as a sign of communion with the Church and of participation in the Sacrifice itself, and also to provide for the necessary expenses of divine worship and for the support of the clergy (who were leading a common life) and of the poor.

In the first centuries of the Church, indeed, offerings of this kind were made only in bread and wine, then also in produce, oil, and incense. But already long before the eighth century the custom prevailed that, in place of the aforesaid offerings, or at least together with them, money was contributed as an offering for the sacrifice, destined for the common chest or treasury of the church. Then, as the common life of clerics gradually ceased, and especially as the private Masses of individual priests multiplied, the faithful began also to bestow an offering in money specifically upon individual priests for a sacrifice to be specifically applied for them. Traces of this practice are already found in documents of the eighth century; its universal use already came down in the twelfth century.¹

¹ Vlaming, Institutiones Iuris Ecclesiastici, n. 349.

II. Division. Stipends are divided into manual stipends, stipends after the manner of manual stipends, and founded stipends. Manual stipends are those which are offered by the faithful for Masses, either from their own devotion, as it were into the hand, or from an obligation, even perpetual, imposed by a testator upon his own heirs (canon 826, § 1). The latter burden the patrimony of some family. Stipends for founded Masses are called "after the manner of manual stipends" when they cannot be applied in their own place, or by those who ought to apply them according to the tables of the foundation, and therefore by law or by indult of the Holy See must be handed over to other priests so that satisfaction may be made for them (canon 826, § 2). Thus stipends of founded Masses become after the manner of manual stipends when they are transmitted to others who satisfy them. Founded stipends are those which are received from the revenues of foundations (canon 826, § 3; n. 233).

III. Lawfulness. According to the received and approved custom and institution of the Church, it is lawful for any priest celebrating and applying Mass to receive an alms or stipend (canon 824, § 1). The reason is that the stipend is not given and accepted after the manner of a price, that is, as a thing with which the Mass is exchanged - which would be simoniacal - but as a thing which is owed to the priest insofar as it is just that one who must serve the utility of others be supported by those others, according to these words of Sacred Scripture: "The laborer is worthy of his food";¹ "Who ever serves as a soldier at his own expense?"² (St. Thomas, II-II, q. 100, a. 2; St. Alphonsus, VI, 316, 320, doubt 4).

Thus it is lawful, even for a wealthy priest, to accept a stipend for a Mass. Nevertheless it would be little praiseworthy to celebrate principally on account of the stipend. Indeed, St. Alphonsus judges that one who acts thus is not easily excused from venial sin, "since it is a certain disorder to direct spiritual things to temporal things" (VI, 317; III, 55, question 6).

Note 1. It is also lawful, as Benedict XIV teaches,³ for priests celebrating with the bishop, for example in the Mass of ordination, to accept a stipend. Likewise it is permitted for newly ordained priests to receive an alms for the three Masses imposed upon them by the bishop (St. Alphonsus, VI, 829).

Note 2. One who celebrates several times in a day, if on one occasion he applies from a title of justice, cannot, except on the day of the Nativity of the Lord, receive an alms for another Mass, apart from some remuneration from an extrinsic title (canon 824, § 2). It is said:

1. From a title of justice, for example because of a stipend received, or if a pastor from office applies for the people; in this case, therefore, the pastor cannot receive a stipend for either Mass. For the rest, it is the same whether the Mass which has a stipend annexed is said in the first place or in the second place.

2. He cannot receive an alms for another Mass. Nevertheless nothing prevents him - provided that he does not receive an alms - from saying another Mass from a title of fidelity or charity; or even of justice, provided that the title of justice is not founded in stipend or in office.⁴

3. From an extrinsic title, for example of chant, hour, or place.⁵

Note 3. From canon 825 it is never lawful:

1. To apply a Mass to the intention of one who is going to request the application with an alms offered, but has not yet requested it, and to retain the alms afterward given for the Mass previously applied (n. 1; cf. n. 208).

2. To receive an alms for a Mass which is owed and applied by another title (n. 2). By another title, whether of justice, fidelity, obedience, etc. The reasons are: both because in the case the one who gave the stipend is more probably deprived of some fruit to which he has a right (n. 207); and because the one giving the stipend, according to received usage, judges that the Mass is applied for himself alone, while the priest accepting the stipend tacitly binds himself to that.

3. To accept a double alms for the application of the same Mass (n. 3; cf. n. 207).

4. To receive one alms for the celebration alone and another for the application, unless it is certain that one offering was made for celebration without application.

¹ Matthew 10:10.

² 1 Corinthians 9:7.

³ De sacrificio Missae, book III, chapter 11.

⁴ Cf. Sacred Congregation of the Council, 14 September 1878 (Collectio, n. 1500).

⁵ By these words the prohibition of the Sacred Congregation of the Council (15 October 1915), which existed on 2 November, was removed (Pontifical Commission, 13 December 1923, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 1924, p. 116). Moreover, Pius IX, by decree of the Sacred Congregation of Propaganda Fide, 15 October 1863, granted to Ordinaries of missions the faculty of allowing, when a just and grave cause intervenes, that priests subject to them may receive a stipend even for a second Mass to be celebrated on the same day. Even outside mission territory such indults are sometimes granted, but only conditionally, namely under the condition that the Masses be applied according to the mind of the bishop, who will receive the alms so that he may expend them for pious causes. If these pious causes are not further indicated, it is also lawful, indeed preferable, that the bishop expend them "in favor of poor priests, not excluding those who repeat the Sacred rite, insofar as they need assistance" (Decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, 7 August 1909, Acta Apostolicae Sedis I, pp. 767-771; cf. especially the report of the consultor prefixed to this decision). In the case, however, the whole alms is to be sent to the bishop (Sacred Congregation of the Council, 27 February 1905; N. K. St., p. 134). Thus Aertnys-Damen, vol. II, n. 202.

IV. The just stipend. It belongs to the local Ordinary to define the manual stipend for Masses in his diocese by decree, issued as far as possible in diocesan synod; nor is it lawful for a priest to demand more than this (canon 831, § 1). Where a decree of the Ordinary is lacking, the custom of the diocese is to be observed (canon 831, § 2). Even religious, although exempt, must stand, concerning the manual stipend, by the decree of the local Ordinary or by the custom of the diocese (canon 831, § 3). Moreover:

1. A larger stipend than the local Ordinary or the custom of the diocese has established cannot be demanded. Nevertheless, when more ample stipends are generally provided, it does not seem illicit to say: "I cannot personally discharge your stipends unless you give as much as others have given."¹ Besides, it is not per se prohibited to require compensation for extraordinary labor or inconvenience, for example if a sung Mass is requested, or one to be said at a certain time or place, or if a journey must be made (St. Alphonsus, III, 55).

Corollary. One who demands a stipend larger than the statute permits sins against religion, for the law obliges from this virtue; likewise he sins against justice if he demands more than is fitting. He is not, however, guilty of simony unless he sells something spiritual, for example by demanding a larger stipend because of an indulgence annexed to an altar.

2. A larger stipend freely offered can be accepted (canon 832); nor can the bishop prohibit a larger one from being offered.²

3. Likewise a smaller stipend can be accepted, unless the local Ordinary has prohibited it (canon 832). If a prohibition has been made, it is not judged prohibited to accept a smaller stipend if a reason of mercy requires it.

4. If someone has offered a sum of money for the application of Masses, without indicating their number, this number is to be computed according to the alms of the place in which the offerer was staying, unless it ought legitimately to be presumed that his intention was otherwise (canon 830). These things are also to be applied to a testator.

¹ Aertnys-Damen, II, n. 207.

² Sacred Congregation of the Council, 16 January 1649.

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.

I. To what extent someone must or can distribute or transmit Masses you may gather from these points:

1. One who has Masses to be celebrated by others should distribute them as soon as possible, with the prescription of canon 841 remaining firm; but the legitimate time for their celebration begins from the day on which the priest who is going to celebrate them received them, unless something else is clear (canon 837). There is question, for example, of the administrator of a pious cause, of an executor of a testament, of an heir. Let them distribute the Masses as soon as possible, lest the celebration be delayed too much.

2. Those who have a number of Masses of which they may freely dispose can give them to priests acceptable to themselves, provided they know well that these priests are above every exception or are recommended by the testimony of their own Ordinary (canon 838).¹ It is said to priests; hence it is not lawful to hand them over, for example, to booksellers, etc. Nevertheless nothing prevents their being handed over to a priest who distributes them among other priests. They can also be handed over to priests who live or are staying in another diocese,² since the Code does not distinguish and requires only that the priest be above every exception, that is, truly trustworthy, or recommended by his own Ordinary, that is, the Ordinary of the one accepting, although perhaps he is living in another diocese. Moreover, the disposition of some provincial councils, by which it is forbidden for stipends to be sent to another diocese without the permission of the Ordinary, is sustained only - unless a privilege is added³ - with respect to founded Masses, Masses after the manner of manual Masses, or manual Masses given with regard to a pious cause.⁴ From these things you may deduce what the local Ordinary can do in this matter.

3. All and individual administrators of pious causes, or persons bound in any way to fulfill Mass burdens, whether clerics or laypersons, at the end of each year should hand over to their Ordinaries, according to the manner to be defined by these Ordinaries, the Mass burdens for which satisfaction has not yet been made. This time, however, is to be taken in such a way that in Masses after the manner of manual Masses the obligation of depositing them runs from the end of that year within which the burdens ought to have been fulfilled; but in manual Masses, after a year from the day the burden was undertaken, with the different will of those offering preserved (canon 841, §§ 1 and 2). Namely, those offering manual stipends can grant that the Masses be delayed more than a year.

¹ Cf. Sacred Congregation of the Council, 17 July 1655.

² By these provisions the decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Council (22 May 1897, Acta Sanctae Sedis, vol. 40, p. 344), by which stipends could not be transmitted to priests residing outside the diocese except through their Ordinary, or at least after he had been heard and had consented, was removed. Likewise the decrees which prohibited the direct transmission of Masses to Oriental priests seem to have been removed.

³ A privilege of this kind was granted for a time to the bishops of Holland.

⁴ Sacred Congregation of the Council, 19 February 1921.

II. Those who hand over to others for celebration Masses received from the faithful or in any way committed to their trust are held by the obligation until they have obtained testimony from them of the obligation accepted and of the stipend received (canon 839). Thus positive law does not extend itself more broadly; but with natural law considered, one would not be immune from obligation if he transmitted a Mass whose obligation of celebration he himself had undertaken, and afterward learned that the celebration of the Mass was being neglected (cf. n. 224).

III. One who transmits Masses is bound to transmit the stipend, as follows:

1. One who transmits manual Mass stipends to others must transmit what has been accepted in full, unless either the offerer expressly permits something to be retained, or it is certainly clear that the excess above the diocesan tax was given in consideration of the person (canon 840, § 1). Thus, per se, the celebrant has the right to receive the whole stipend, and indeed either in its own species, or, if the priest who is going to celebrate consents, in an equivalent,¹ for example in books. Likewise, even without the consent of the celebrant, if there is question of vicars living in the pastor's house, the excess of the common stipend can be given to them in board and service.² Finally, as regards the same vicars, the custom can be sustained that they always celebrate according to the intention of the pastor, who grants them board and service, while they receive a determined pension from the treasury of the church or from the pastor.³

One who transmits a manual offering can retain something: 1. when the offerer expressly permits it; 2. when it is certain that the excess above the diocesan tax was given in consideration of the person, for example because the one to whom the Mass was offered is poor, or a relative, friend, or even pastor of the offerer;⁴ 3. if the excess of the customary tax pertains to stole fees, as if there is question of a nuptial or funeral Mass.⁵ In other cases the one who is going to celebrate has the right to the whole stipend. Nothing, however, prevents him, by yielding his right altogether spontaneously, from leaving the offering or part of it to the one transmitting. But now, just as before, it seems illicit to ask the one who is going to celebrate to yield the stipend or part of it. For, considering the Constitution of Benedict XIV Quanta cura,⁶ where a request of this kind is called an execrable abuse, and canon 827, it must be doubted whether the old law has been changed. In doubt, however, one must not depart from the old law (canon 6, 4).

2. In Masses after the manner of manual Masses, unless the mind of the founder stands in the way, the excess is legitimately retained, and it suffices to remit only the manual alms of the diocese in which the Mass is celebrated, if the ample alms takes the place in part of the endowment of the benefice or pious cause (canon 840, § 2). Whether or not the added condition has place is to be gathered: 1. from the tables of the foundation themselves, when they expressly testify that the whole annual fruit of the foundation was designated as stipend; 2. from the nature of the benefice to which the foundation is annexed, namely if all or the greatest part of the revenues of the benefice consist in these stipends; 3. from custom, when more ample stipends have always been held as a part of the revenues; and 4. from an authentic declaration of the Ordinary.⁷

¹ The decree Ut debita prescribed that stipends were to be handed over in full and in their own species (article 9).

² Sacred Congregation of the Council, 25 February 1905, in the Breda case, ad I (Acta Sanctae Sedis, vol. 38, p. 15); 25 February 1910, in the Luxembourg case (Acta Apostolicae Sedis 1910, p. 203).

³ Sacred Congregation of the Council, in the Breda case, ad III (Acta Sanctae Sedis, loc. cit.); 10 January, in the Montesson case (Acta Apostolicae Sedis 1920, p. 70).

⁴ Cf. Sacred Penitentiary, 6 April 1742 (Collectio, n. 336); Sacred Congregation of the Council, 31 January 1880.

⁵ Cf. Sacred Congregation of the Council, 25 July 1874 (Collectio, n. 1422); 11 May 1888.

⁶ 30 June 1741.

⁷ N. K. Stemmen, 1918, p. 9; Aertnys-Damen, II, n. 212.

Corollary I. At the request of either party it is lawful to exchange intentions, while the unequal stipend is retained, if this is done so that offices are exchanged;¹ otherwise, if it is done principally for the sake of taking profit.² The reason for the former is that every base gain is absent. The reason for the latter is that illicit gain does not seem to be absent; cf. canon 827 (St. Alphonsus, VI, 322, doubt 4).

Corollary II. One who by office has care of distributing stipends can demand a moderate payment from those to whom the Masses are distributed (St. Alphonsus, VI, 322, doubt 8). And generally, one who transmits Masses can deduct expenses of administration and transfer.³ Administrators of churches, however, cannot retain part of the stipend for the expenses of altars, servers, light, wine, hosts, etc., unless the church is pressed by poverty⁴ (St. Alphonsus, 322, doubt 5). Nor is it lawful to subtract anything from the manual alms which the faithful are accustomed to hand over to more celebrated shrines, in order to provide for their dignity and ornament.⁵

Corollary III. One who unduly retains part of a stipend sins against strict justice, and therefore is bound to restitution from the same virtue, as follows:

1. An executor of a testament who retains part of the sum to be expended in Mass stipends certainly violates strict justice. The same, according to the Constitution of Benedict XIV Quanta cura, § 1 sq., must be said of those who collect stipends for this end: that Masses be celebrated elsewhere, where stipends are smaller.

2. There is dispute about others; but with St. Alphonsus (VI, 322, doubt 1) it seems altogether to be affirmed. For ownership of the stipend is not acquired except according to the intention of the giver. But the intention of the giver seems to be that the one who fulfills the burden also receive the stipend. Objection. Nothing prevents the recipient of the stipend from fulfilling the burden through another. Response. Granted; but from the intention of the one giving the stipend, in other words, by force of this contract, that other person who fulfills the burden seems to receive a right in the stipend given. From what has been said, against some authors it is also deduced that the stipend must be restored to the celebrant, not to the one giving the alms (St. Alphonsus, VI, loc. cit.).

¹ For example, a missionary occupied with spiritual exercises takes upon himself the Mass and intention announced for the sixth hour, so that a chaplain, a sufficiently sick old man, may be able to celebrate; and he hands over to this chaplain his own intention to be discharged, without any discussion about exchanging stipends.

² For example, someone has a Mass with an ample stipend to be celebrated today. But, hindered unexpectedly from celebrating, he summons another priest and proposes to him, who has a smaller stipend, that the Masses be exchanged, namely so that he himself takes upon himself the other priest's intention to be discharged on the following day.

³ Sacred Congregation of the Council, in the Breda case, 25 February 1905, Mens est.

⁴ Constitution of Innocent XII, Nuper, ad VII.

⁵ Decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Council Ut debita (article 11).

From Mass stipends, thus canon 827, every kind even of negotiation or commerce is altogether to be kept away. This canon is neglected: 1. by those who of their own accord retain part of the stipend (n. 227); 2. by those who ask others that, when Masses have been transferred, they may retain part of the stipend (n. 227); 3. by booksellers or merchants who collect stipends and, in place of them, give books, periodicals, or other merchandise to priests who are going to celebrate the Masses,¹ whether with profit (commerce) or without profit (a species of commerce). The author of the stipend, however, can offer other things to the one who is going to celebrate, in place of money.

¹ Decree Ut debita of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, 11 May 1904 (article 8); cf. Sacred Congregation of the Council, 9 September 1874; decree Vigilanti studio, 23 May 1893.

I. Supervision. The right and duty of watching so that Mass burdens are fulfilled belongs, in churches of seculars, to the local Ordinary; in churches of religious, to their superiors (canon 842).

II. Notation of Masses. 1. Rectors of churches and of other pious places, whether secular or religious, in which alms for Masses are customarily received, should have a special book in which they accurately note the number, intention, alms, and celebration of the Masses received (canon 843, § 1). Ordinaries are held by the obligation of examining books of this kind, either personally or through others, at least once each year (canon 843, § 2). Ordinaries, that is, local Ordinaries or major superiors in exempt clerical religious institutes (canon 198, § 1).

2. Likewise local Ordinaries and religious superiors who entrust Masses to be celebrated to their own subjects or to others should quickly enter in order into a book the Masses which they have received with their alms, and should take care according to their powers that they be celebrated as soon as possible. Indeed, all priests, whether secular or religious, must accurately note which Mass intentions each one has received and which he has satisfied (canon 844). It suffices, however, that one note the Masses through another.

III. Penalties. Those who have offended against the prescription of canon 827, 828, or 840, § 1 are to be punished by the Ordinary according to the gravity of the fault, not excluding, if the matter bears it, suspension or privation of an ecclesiastical benefice or office, or, if there is question of laypersons, excommunication (canon 2324). The penalties of latae sententiae previously established have been abrogated.

I. Notion and nature. By the name of pious foundations are signified temporal goods given in any way to some moral person in the Church, with the burden, in perpetuity or for a long time, of celebrating some Masses from the annual revenues, or of fulfilling other predefined ecclesiastical functions, or of performing some works of piety and charity (canon 1544, § 1). A foundation, once legitimately accepted, takes on the nature of a synallagmatic contract: I give that you may do (canon 1544, § 2).

Note. It belongs to the local Ordinary (or, if there is question of pious foundations in churches, even parochial ones, of exempt religious, to the major superior) to prescribe norms concerning the amount of endowment below which a pious foundation cannot be admitted, and concerning the proper distribution of its fruits (canon 1545, compared with canon 1550).

II. Acceptance of a foundation. 1. In order that foundations of this kind can be accepted by a moral person, the consent of the local Ordinary is required, given in writing (or, if there is question of exempt religious, the consent of the major superior), who should not furnish it before he has legitimately ascertained that the moral person is able to satisfy both the new burden to be undertaken and the old burdens already undertaken. Above all, he should take care that the revenues correspond altogether to the burdens annexed, according to the custom of each diocese. In the acceptance, constitution, and administration of a foundation, the patron of the church has no right (canon 1546).

2. Foundations, even those made orally, are to be committed to writing. One copy of the records is to be kept safely in the archive of the Curia (or of the major superior), and the other in the archive of the moral person to which the foundation pertains (canon 1548).

Note 1. Money and movable goods assigned under the name of donation are immediately to be deposited in a safe place, designated by the same Ordinary (or major superior), for this end: that the same money or the value of the movable goods be preserved and, as soon as possible, be invested cautiously and usefully according to the prudent judgment of the same Ordinary, after those whose interest is involved and the diocesan council of administration (or the council of the major superior) have been heard, for the benefit of the same foundation, with express and individual mention of the burden (canon 1547).

Note 2. With the prescriptions of canons 1514-1517 and canon 1525 observed, in any church there is to be drawn up a table of the burdens incumbent from pious foundations, which is to be kept by the rector in a safe place (canon 1549, § 1). Likewise, besides the book of which canon 843, § 1 speaks, another book is to be kept and preserved by the rector, in which the individual perpetual and temporary burdens, their fulfillment, and the alms are noted, so that an exact account of all these things may be rendered to the local Ordinary (or major superior) (canon 1549, § 2).

Note 3. If there is question of churches, even parochial ones, of exempt religious, all the things set forth above must be observed, but in such a way that the assigned rights and duties belong exclusively to the major superior (canon 1550). But if there is question of churches of non-exempt religious, the rights set forth are reserved to the local Ordinary, even if the parish has been united to the religious house with full right (cited canon, compared with the response of the Pontifical Commission).¹

¹ 25 July 1926, ad IV (Acta Apostolicae Sedis 1926, p. 393).

III. The obligation of a foundation, as regards Masses, is both to celebrate as many Masses as have been established, and to fulfill the other things imposed by the founder, for example as to the quality of the Mass, place, altar, hour, etc. (n. 220). The obligation of celebrating as many times as is expressed in the foundation is grave. How great the obligation of the other adjuncts is must be gathered from what has been said generally about the obligation arising from a stipend (n. 222). Neglect of the adjuncts does not induce the obligation of celebrating another Mass, or of restoring the stipend or part of it, unless the priest accepted an excess of stipend in consideration of a greater inconvenience; for example, if he accepted a larger stipend for a sung Mass and did not sing it. For the rest, note:

1. Unless it is otherwise expressed, someone can fulfill the burden either personally or through another (St. Alphonsus, VI, 330).

2. If it is not determined for whom the Masses are to be applied, the obligation of applying them to the founder himself is presumed;¹ and all things are safeguarded if the application is made according to the intention of the founder.

3. If the founder did not order all the Masses to be celebrated for himself, but ordered a certain number from them to be celebrated for himself or according to his intention, he is presumed to have left free the application of the remaining Masses (St. Alphonsus, loc. cit.).

4. To a benefice there is sometimes annexed the burden either of celebrating daily or of celebrating and applying daily. Moreover:

a) One who is bound personally to celebrate can sometimes omit Mass for a just cause. Nevertheless he is bound to supply through another if the burden immediately falls upon the church or community; otherwise, if it immediately falls upon the beneficiary. Just causes for sometimes omitting Mass are:

alpha) Religion; namely, the beneficiary can, for the sake of reverence, according to some authors abstain from celebrating once a week, according to others once a month.

beta) A reasonable impediment, such as a journey to be made, spiritual exercises to be performed, etc. To this also belongs:

gamma) Illness. If this is brief, the beneficiary is not bound to supply through another; if it is more lasting, he is bound to supply through another. Illness is judged brief, according to some, if it is of fifteen days; according to others, of one month; according to others, of two months. This last opinion is held by St. Alphonsus as sufficiently probable² (VI, 333).

b) One who is bound personally to celebrate and apply can, just as one who is bound only to celebrate, sometimes omit the sacred rite for a just cause. He can also sometimes - for example six times a year - offer for himself or for others, but he cannot accept a stipend.³ If he does not personally apply, he is bound, as was said of one who must personally celebrate daily, to supply through another if the burden was imposed immediately upon the church, etc.; otherwise, if it was imposed directly upon the beneficiary.

¹ Sacred Congregation of the Council, 18 March 1668; 26 March 1718.

² The declarations of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, 4 June 1689 and 17 November 1695, do not seem to settle the question.

³ Sacred Congregation of the Council, 18 September 1683 (Collectio, n. 228); Pontifical Commission, 14 July 1922 (Acta Apostolicae Sedis 1922, p. 529).

IV. Cessation or change of the obligation. The causes of cessation are assigned as reduction, total defect of revenues, and condonation. Reduction is the concession of diminishing the works, for example the number of Masses, established by a pious foundation. Condonation is the concession of omitting works, for example Masses, which ought to have been celebrated in past time. That the Holy See enjoys the faculty of condoning and reducing Masses is clear from c. 2, Clem., de religiosis domibus (III, 11), and from the practice of the Church. For the rest, the Holy See can compensate the loss arising to founders, both by supplying from the treasury of the Church and by enjoining other works. Moreover:

1. The reduction of burdens which weigh upon pious foundations is reserved to the Apostolic See alone, unless something else is expressly provided in the tables of the foundation (canon 1551, § 1). Nevertheless, with the reduction of Masses excepted, these words of canon 1517, § 2 hold: "If, however, the execution of the imposed burdens, because of diminished revenues or another cause, without any fault of the administrators, has become impossible, then the Ordinary too, after those whose interest is involved have been heard, and with the will of the founder preserved in the better way possible, will be able equitably to diminish the same burdens." Moreover, an accidental change made for a time and for a just cause, for example the transfer of a Mass from one hour to another, does not seem to exceed the faculty of the bishop, unless there was a special reason for assigning a certain hour.

"The causes, moreover, on account of which the Apostolic See is accustomed to reduce Masses are: scarcity of priests, slenderness of the stipend or increase of the current stipend, diminution of the revenues of a monastery, or greater necessary expenses for sustenance, etc.; finally, if the necessity of the brethren, or of the fabric of the church or monastery, should press" (St. Alphonsus, VI, 331). For reduction recourse should be had to the Sacred Congregation of the Council.

Note 1. An indult of reducing founded Masses is not extended either to other Masses owed from contract or to other burdens of the pious foundation. But a general indult of reducing the burdens of pious foundations is to be understood, unless something else is clear, in such a way that the holder of the indult should reduce other burdens rather than Masses (canon 1551, §§ 2 and 3).

Note 2. It is advised that the founder insert into the document of foundation the faculty of diminishing the number of Masses if the revenues do not furnish an equitable stipend for the individual Masses.

2. Total defect of revenues; for when these fail, the title on which the burdens rest falls.¹ That the revenues are diminished, or for another reason no longer constitute an equitable stipend, does not per se suffice for the burdens to be diminished; this follows from what was said above. But if the founder assigned a stipend for individual Masses, or did not determine the number of Masses, the number can indeed be diminished proportionately according to the stipend determined for the individual Masses or according to the diocesan tax.

3. Condonation of burdens² is altogether reserved to the Apostolic See. Recourse is to be had for the external forum to the Sacred Congregation of the Council; for the internal forum to the Sacred Penitentiary.

¹ Cf. Sacred Congregation of the Council, 7 July 1686; 18 August 1705.

² Note from canon 1509, 5, that burdens of Masses are not extinguished by prescription.

Special Duties from Canon Law of Those Who Have Care of Souls.—(a) Bishops have grave obligations of residing in their see or diocese (Canon 338), of attending to the instruction of their flock (Canons 1327, 336), of applying the Mass pro populo (Canon 339), of making a diocesan report (Canon 340), of confirming and of ordaining worthy candidates (Canon 785), of visiting their dioceses (Canon 343), of making the ad limina visit (Canons 340, 342), and of calling a diocesan synod at least every tenth year (Canon 356).

(b) Pastors must reside generally in their parish (Canon 465), and, if lawfully absent, they must make provision for the sick calls and other spiritual necessities of their flocks. They must preach the word of God on Sundays and holydays, and it would be a serious matter to neglect this duty for a considerable time (e.g., a whole month) without good reason (Canon 1344). It is also a serious obligation to attend to the necessary catechetical instruction of young and old (Canons 1330, 1332), to apply the Mass pro populo (Canon 466), and to administer the Sacraments (at least Baptism, Penance, Extreme Unction) to those in grave spiritual need (see 1167). Pastors are also obliged to know their flock, to visit the sick and dying, to correct abuses, to see that the customary administration of the Sacraments and the usual church functions are attended to, to watch over the schooling of the children, and to direct the temporalities and attend to the reports and records of the parish. The duties of chaplains of hospitals, institutions, soldiers, etc., are similar to those of pastors, but in particular cases the former are subject to special prescriptions or to local usage or to rules made by the Ordinary.

(c) Assistant pastors are subject in the care of souls to the instruction and direction of the parish-priest. Their particular duties are known from the diocesan statutes, the letters of the Ordinary, and the commission of the pastor. Regularly, they are bound to reside in the parish rectory and to assist the pastor or supply for him in all the parish work, the Mass pro populo excepted (Canon 476).

Application of the Mass.—All the faithful, especially those who are present and also the celebrant himself, benefit by the Mass, but there is a special fruit reserved to those for whose intention the Mass is offered by the priest; for the Mass is a sacrifice of intercession, propitiation, and satisfaction, and since the priest acts in the person of Christ he may apply its benefits specially to some particular person or persons. In the following cases the celebrant is bound to make this application of the ministerial fruit of the Mass.

(a) In virtue of their office, pastors are seriously obliged to say Mass for their flocks. There is a natural obligation on account of the relationship between the pastor and the people, and there is also a divine obligation, inasmuch as the priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices for sin (Heb., v, 1). The details of this duty, as to the time, place and person, are prescribed in Canons 306, 339, 466. There is a grave duty of saying for the people the number of Masses which the Church orders; but the non-observance of the circumstances is not a mortal sin, unless it happens frequently and without reason.

(b) In virtue of justice, a priest who has received a stipend is bound to apply the Mass for the intention of the donor, and to observe the conditions of the agreement (i.e., the time, place, and kind of Mass specified by the donor). The duty of application is a grave one, because the loss inflicted on the donor by non-application of the Mass to his intention is serious; the duty of observance of the accidental conditions, however, is not generally grave, but it becomes grave if its neglect inflicts serious harm (e.g., if the donor makes the date of the Mass a conditio sine qua non, or if the Mass must be said at once on account of an urgent and immediate necessity). Restitution is obligatory if the Mass is not applied, or if essential conditions are not complied with; it is obligatory sub gravi, if the stipend equals what is relatively grave matter in theft.

(c) In virtue of obedience, subjects are held to apply Masses for the intention of their prelates, secular or religious, though bishops are counselled to exact this most rarely. The obligation is grave or light according to the intention of the superior, but if the application is also due in justice to the giver of the stipend, there is a serious duty.

(d) In virtue of religion or fidelity, there is an obligation of application when a priest has vowed this to God, or freely promised it to man. The duty is grave or light according to the intention of the vower or promisor (see 2210, 2407). But if there is an onerous promise (e.g., in a society of priests whose members agree to say Mass for fellow-members who have died), the duty is one of justice. One Mass satisfies several free promises, if distinct Masses were not promised.

Duties of the Priest as to the Application of Mass.—(a) For Whom May Mass Be Applied?—Mass may be offered for all objects not forbidden. From the divine law it is forbidden to offer Mass for those who are incapable of receiving its benefits (e.g., the demons, infants who died without Baptism, the Saints), or for intentions that are displeasing to God (e.g., for success in evil). From the ecclesiastical law certain restrictions are made on the application of Mass in order to safeguard reverence and prevent scandal. Thus, Mass may be said only privately (that is, without publicity or special liturgical solemnity) and prudently (that is, with avoidance of scandal, for example, by the declaration that Mass is said for the faithful departed with the purpose of aiding also a departed unbeliever, if this is pleasing to God) for the living and dead outside the Church, such as infidels, heretics, schismatics, and the excommunicated. Moreover, for a vitandus Mass may be applied only when the intention is his conversion (Canon 809).

(b) How Mass Must Be Applied.—The intention must be formed by the priest, since he represents Christ. But since his application does not produce but only bestows the fruits, it suffices that his applicatory intention be habitual and implicit, as when the celebrant has forgotten the intention formed before Mass, or applies according to the mind of his superior. The person or purpose to which Mass is applied must be at least implicitly determined, and the application must be made at least before the second consecration. If there are two conflicting intentions, the stronger prevails (2667), and, if it is doubtful which one was stronger, Mass should be next offered for the intention which God knows was not satisfied. It is unlawful to apply Mass by anticipation for the next person who will offer a stipend.

"1. Whether apostolic Vicars and Missionaries, who in whatever way undertake care of souls in some determinate place, are bound indiscriminately from justice to apply Mass for the people on feast days? And insofar as affirmatively: 2. Upon which Apostolic Vicars and Missionaries does a burden of this kind fall? 3. Whether to those who are not bound from justice one must respond: it is fitting from charity, or: they are bound from charity, to apply Mass for the people? 4. Whether, the formula 'they are bound from charity' being approved, this ought to be understood of obligation under grave sin? Resp. To 1. Negatively, provided that the matter is not concerning places in which the Episcopal Sees and Parishes are already canonically erected, and to these the Apostolic Vicar and Missionary have been sent, so that they may act in the place of legitimate Pastors. To 2. Provision has been made in the first. To 3. The expression 'to be bound from charity' is to be avoided; but it is to be said 'to be fitting from charity,' and this in such a way that no signification of properly so called obligation appears. To 4. Provision has been made in the third." S. C. de P. F. 23 March 1863. Previously the S. C. had answered: "Missionaries are bound from charity." Cf. Acta S. Sed. Vol. 1, p. 407.

1. "Whether the obligation of applying Mass for the people, which according to the law of the Western Church is imposed on parish priests and other ecclesiastical men obtaining the care of souls, has place similarly for the same persons of the Oriental rite? And insofar as affirmatively. 2. Concerning the determination of days, whether the laws and reasonable customs which perhaps are in force in some dioceses of the said rite ought to be observed? 3. In defect of these laws and customs, whether determination of this kind ought to be made according to the norm and in every part according to Western laws? 4. Whether because of grave causes and circumstances there can be place for some reduction of days predefined by Western laws, and even for total dispensation, yet with the obligation of praying for the people in those very Masses which would have to be applied for them? Resp. To 1. Affirmatively, the doubt having been reformed as follows: Whether the obligation of applying Mass for the people, which according to the law of the Western Church is imposed on Bishops and parish priests, has place similarly for the same persons of the Oriental rite? To 2. Affirmatively. To 3. Negatively. To 4. Provision has been made in the third, and according to the mind. The mind is that, when opportunity has been given, there be manifested to the Bishops of the Eastern Church the obligation which also in the same Church falls upon pastors of souls of applying Mass for the people some times, and therefore that, as pertains to the determination of days, the discipline of the Western Church be explained to them, so that they may take light from it by which they may be able to judge how far the same discipline can agree with their dioceses, and likewise that they propose to the Holy See, in whatever case, the temperaments which are judged more necessary." S. C. de P. F. 23 March 1863. Cf. Acta S. Sed. Vol. 1, p. 389 ff.

Also immune from this obligation are vicars or coadjutors of Parish Priests who do not exercise primary care of souls but only subsidiary care, Chaplains of Nuns, Chaplains of Hospitals, and of other places of this kind. S. R. C. 14 June 1845; 7 Dec. 1844; S. C. C. 2 June 1860.

"Whether parish priests ought to offer the Sacrifice of Holy Mass for the people, if they are not impeded by a legitimate cause, or whether they can satisfy this office through another, for example a sacristan or a visiting presbyter. Resp. Affirmatively to the first part, negatively to the second, except in the case of true necessity and when a canonical cause concurs." S. C. C. 25 Sept. 1847; 18 July 1789. Cf. Lucidi, ch. 3, sec. 2, n. 569 ff.

"Whether the application must always be made by the parish priest, even when celebrating privately, while another celebrates the parochial Mass? Resp. Affirmatively according to decrees issued at other times." S. R. C. 20 Dec. 1864.

"Whether parish priests on Sundays and other feast days, with a corpse present, can celebrate Mass for the deceased, and transfer to another day the Mass to be applied for the people in the case? And insofar as negatively, whether at least they can supply the application of Mass for the people through another priest in the case? Resp. To the 1st and 2nd, negatively." S. C. C. 26 Jan. 1771.

"1. Whether a parish priest absent from his parish on a feast day satisfies his obligation by celebrating Mass for the people in the place where he is staying, or rather is bound to substitute another who may say Mass for the people in his own Church? 2. Whether he is bound to apply Mass for the people in the place where he is staying, or rather, returning to the parish, is bound to apply in his own church? 3. Whether a parish priest legitimately impeded because of illness from celebrating Mass is bound, after health has been recovered, to apply as many Masses for the people as he omitted during the illness, whether in the case in which he could celebrate neither by himself nor through another, or in the case in which he could through another but from some empty fear or negligence did not take care, or did not obtain, that another celebrate for him? Resp. A parish priest legitimately absent from his parish on a feast day satisfies his obligation by applying Mass for his own people in the place where he stays, provided that for the necessary convenience of the people another priest celebrates in the parochial Church and explains the word of God. But a parish priest, however legitimately impeded from celebrating Mass, is bound to have it celebrated and applied through another on the feast day for the people in the parochial Church; but if this was not done, as soon as he is able, he ought to apply Mass for the people." S. C. C. 14 Dec. 1872. Cf. Acta S. Sed. Vol. 7, p. 191.

"1. Whether parish priests ruling two or more parishes are bound on feast days to celebrate two or more Masses for the people, by themselves or through others? 2. And insofar as they are bound by themselves, whether, according to the paths of the Constitution of Benedict XIV Declarasti nobis, the faculty of bination can be made for them? Resp. To the 1st. That the parish priest, as in the case, is bound either by himself or through another to celebrate as many Masses as the parishes he rules. To the 2nd. There is no place for the faculty of repeating Masses, unless, because of defect of clergy, no other priest is present who can celebrate and apply in place of the parish priest." S. C. C. 4 Feb. 1883.

"The Ordinary of the Diocese of Dijon in France sets forth these things: Because of the insufficient number of priests in the Diocese of Dijon, it not rarely happens that the same parish priest serves three churches, namely: 1. his own proper parish; 2. in a permanent manner another church, which, situated in another place and not enjoying a parochial title, is attached to the parochial church; 3. a church of a place having a parochial title, but because of the scarcity of priests, not possessing for a time its own resident parish priest.

By force of his institution, such a parish priest celebrates twice on individual Sundays and feast days, namely in his own parochial church and in the other church, not parochial, but permanently annexed to the parochial church, as is said. Hence it follows that the same by no means can celebrate Mass on Sundays and feast days in the third church, namely of the parish of which he has care for a time. Yet since he is bound to watch over that parish in which he does not reside, both for visiting the sick and for catechizing children and fulfilling many other duties, he receives two hundred francs from the Gallic government for the above-mentioned functions.

We ask: 1. Whether such a priest ought to supply the Masses which he cannot celebrate for his second parish on Sundays and feast days, with attention also to this circumstance, that the said pension of two hundred francs scarcely remunerates the aforesaid duties, the two parishes being very distant from each other; 2. Whether he ought to apply one or the other of the Masses which he celebrates, as has been said, on individual Sundays and feasts, at the same time for each parish; 3. Whether he ought to apply to this parish deprived of Mass that Mass which is celebrated in the annexed church without parochial title?

Since it has happened that several priests in good faith did not celebrate for their second parish, as in the case, we ask that their omissions, if it is necessary, be condoned.

Resp. To 1. Affirmatively, except that it would be desirable that he celebrate the second Mass in the second parish. To 2. It is not lawful. To 3. Affirmatively, if he cannot celebrate in the second parish, word having been had with the Most Holy Lord also as regards sanation as regards the past." S. C. C. 24 July 1886.

"Since several Benefices from their foundation have the burden of Mass to be applied on all feast days, a doubt emerges whether individual beneficiaries are obligated to this, even on feasts suppressed up to this time by the Apostolic See? Resp. According to resolutions issued at other times in similar matters, that they are bound." S. C. C. 15 Dec. 1856.

Whether an obligation exists of celebrating Mass in such a Church or at an altar, imposed only for feast days of precept, also on those days which, although they were of precept at the time of the founder, afterwards were suppressed? Resp. Negatively, if namely that obligation was imposed only for the greater convenience of the people. S. C. EE. and RR. 1 March 1872. Cf. Acta S. Sed. Vol. 7, p. 276.

Cf. no. 213

“Since several benefices have from their foundation the burden of applying Mass on all feast days, the doubt arises whether individual beneficiaries are bound to this even on feasts hitherto suppressed by the Apostolic See.—Response. According to resolutions issued elsewhere in similar matters, they are bound.” Sacred Congregation of the Council, 15 December 1856.

Does the obligation exist of celebrating Mass in a particular church or at an altar, imposed only for feast days of precept, also on those days which, though days of precept at the time of the founder, were afterward suppressed?—Response. Negative, if namely that obligation was imposed only for the greater convenience of the people. Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars, 1 March 1872. Cf. A. S. S., vol. 7, p. 276.

Is there an obligation of applying Mass for another? - Resp. In the affirmative; for it is had 1. from the law itself, for bishops, pastors, chapters of cathedral or collegiate churches; 2. from the will of testators, for beneficed persons, chaplains, heirs, legatees, etc.; 3. from a pact, when a stipend has been accepted, or from a gratuitous promise. And these Masses are customarily called manual, so that they may be distinguished from other founded Masses, owed from foundation. L. 314-317. But it is not simoniacal to accept a stipend for Mass; for "the priest does not accept money as the price of the consecration of the Eucharist... for this would be simoniacal, but as a stipend of his support." St. Thomas 2.2, q. 100, a. 2 ad 2. Nonetheless even rich priests can accept a stipend, "both because today it is permitted by the custom of the universal Church, and because every workman, whether rich or poor, is worthy of his wage." L. 317. And St. Thomas favors this, Quodl. 6, a. 10. - E. M.

622 bis. Note: On the feasts suppressed by the very recent Motu Proprio, which is immediately in force, namely Corpus Christi, Purification, Annunciation, and Nativity of the B. V. Mary, St. Joseph Spouse of the same B. V. Mary, St. John Apostle and Evangelist, and the Patron of each place or diocese, the obligation remains of offering the sacred rite for the people. S. C. C., Aug. 8, 1911. - During the present condition of affairs, in France, pastors are altogether bound to continue worship in their church and to remain in the parochial buildings until they are violently expelled. - For supplying pious legacies abolished in France, it has been established perpetually that every year, on one of the Sundays of the month of November, in all the churches of France, a Requiem Mass be celebrated for the aforesaid end.

Is a priest guilty of simony who celebrates chiefly by reason of the accepted stipend? - Resp. In the negative per se, namely if he does not hold the stipend as the price of the sacrifice of the Mass and has accepted it only as a stipend for support. - But he cannot be excused from sin, since it is most odious and shameful that someone abuse the sacred ministry for the sake of gaining money. Yet a priest does not sin who celebrates accessorily in view of the remuneration to be received, especially if it is necessary for him. Nor per se is he stained by any blemish who, with a stipend accepted, is determined to celebrating, although otherwise he would have omitted the sacred rite; for then he is moved not by reason of the stipend, but by the obligation to be fulfilled. Cf. vol. 1, nn. 511, 512; E. M.

Is the obligation of applying Mass grave? - Resp. In the affirmative, if it proceeds from law, or from the will of the deceased, or from a pact when a stipend has been accepted. For the matter is grave, since another is deprived of a great fruit. And one is bound to restitution. L. 315. - If the stipend accepted is not grave matter, some deny that it is grave; others more probably affirm it, because, a pact from justice standing, a grave harm is always unjustly inflicted on another. There is added the grave precept of the Church in this matter, as is more than sufficiently clear from so many published Constitutions and Decrees. And this is confirmed from the common estimation in this matter; for the stipend taxed for Masses of one or two lire is not matter grave in itself, and yet all who do not celebrate Masses owed from an ordinary stipend believe that they sin gravely and are bound to restitution. L. 317. And this holds even if someone knowingly and willingly accepted small stipends, unless they are so small that he seems to have promised gratuitously. Innocent XII, Const. Nuper; L. 320. - If Mass is owed from a simple promise, it is not grave to omit it, because a simple promise does not oblige under grave sin. L. 317. "But all agree that he sins gravely who omits a Mass owed from vow or precept of a Prelate, because no one can doubt that this is grave matter in a vow or precept." L. 317. Nevertheless, if a religious knowingly applies the sacred rite against the will of the superior, the application will be valid. The reason is that the application of Mass is an act of the power of order. But an act of the power of order by no means depends on the faculty of the superior. Therefore, as the intention of confecting the sacraments, so the application of the sacred rite cannot be made invalid by the will of the superior. L. 334. Cf. A. A. S. vol. 6, p. 231.

Personal obligation otherwise excluded of celebrating and applying Mass, commonly speaking it does not matter whether someone celebrates through himself or through another, provided the Mass is celebrated in the due place and time, and the full stipend, not a smaller one, accepted under the sole title of celebration, is conferred on the other, prop. 9 condemned by Alexander VII; this has place only in manual Masses, which are not given in view of the person but in view of the Mass to be celebrated. And this is so that every base profit may be removed. Innocent XII, Const. Nuper; Benedict XIV, Enc. Quanta cura; L. 321. Wherefore whoever subtracts part of the stipend is guilty of sacrilege and injustice, and is bound to restitution toward the celebrant, even if that part is small and is spent for a pious use, unless the other wholly spontaneously, and therefore not asked, remitted the excess. Benedict XIV, Enc. Quanta cura; prop. 9 condemned by Alexander VII; L. 321, 322. Indeed one sins gravely, regularly speaking, not only if he omits the Mass, but also if he does not celebrate it within the defined time; or, if none is determined, within a moderate time, i.e., within one month, unless the one giving the alms consents to the delay. Innocent, Const. Nuper, ad 1; L. 317. Once the designated time has elapsed, he will still then be able to celebrate, although he has already sinned, unless the cause of the celebration has ceased; for then he is bound to restitution, even if he afterward celebrates. L. 317. - Likewise it is grave if someone does not celebrate in the prescribed place, and the place, from a grave cause, is intended per se. The same must be said of day and hour, if they have been determined for a grave cause. Yet one who, having accepted a stipend for celebrating Mass on a privileged altar, celebrated it on another altar in good faith, having made a proportionate compensation by afterward gaining a plenary indulgence applicable to the dead, need not restore the stipend. L. 328, 329. Cf. nn. 1238, 1375, 1377; E. M.

Resolutions: The whole stipend is not to be handed over to another celebrant if someone has received a richer stipend under another title and in view of the person, e.g.: 1. If Mass is to be celebrated by reason of a benefice. Innocent XII, l. c. - 2. By reason of a chaplaincy. S. C. C., Mar. 15, 1745; A. S. S. vol. 8, p. 79. - 3. By reason of a legacy left to someone for life. L. 321. - 4. By reason of the parochial office. S. C. C., July 25, 1874; A. S. S. vol. 8, p. 84. - 5. By reason of a special obligation and burden undertaken. S. C. C., Mar. 24, 1906; A. S. S. vol. 4, p. 40. - 6. By reason of the poverty of the priest, friendship, consanguinity, etc. L. 321; provided this intention of the giver is morally certain. S. C. C., July 25, 1874; A. S. S. vol. 8, p. 94. - 7. And the same holds if a richer stipend is assigned to a pious place and for its benefit. - E. M.

It is not licit to accept several stipends for several Masses and satisfy all by one Mass. Prop. 10 condemned by Alexander VII. If satisfaction can no longer be made for the omitted celebration of Masses, recourse must be had to the Holy See, so that the Supreme Pontiff may deign to supply from the treasury of the Church, by applying the satisfactions of Jesus Christ and the Saints and also by directing the prayers of the Church, to supply the fruit of satisfaction and impetration. Likewise, if Masses to be celebrated cannot be celebrated, recourse must be had to the Holy See for their reduction. Decree of Urban VIII, S. C. C., June 21, 1625; Benedict XIV, De Synodo, l. 13, c. 25, n. 15.

When the revenues of founded Masses fail without any fault of him on whom the burden of celebrating falls, every obligation of celebrating them ceases. S. C. C., Aug. 18, 1705. When revenues are diminished, it is licit to diminish the number of Masses to be celebrated when the founder determined a certain alms to be attributed for each Mass. But if the number of Masses is determined by the founder, and the revenues do not suffice for the ordinary tax of each Mass, the Apostolic See must be approached, which reserved this reduction to itself. Innocent XII, Const. Nuper, Nov. 23, 1697, unless "he who left the legacy had given the Bishop express faculty of diminishing the number of designated Masses; for then it would be licit for the Bishop, without consulting the Apostolic See, to use that faculty." Benedict XIV, De Synodo, l. 5, c. 10, n. 2.

Administrators of churches can subtract expenses for the celebration of Masses from the stipend of those who celebrate in them by reason of chaplaincy or foundation. But from other priests they can exact the payment of the aforesaid expenses as a condition that they be permitted to celebrate Mass in the church. S. C. C., July 6, 1726; Benedict XIV, Inst. 56, n. 13.

625 bis. Note: An Indult is granted to bishops by the S. C. C. for three years, so that in his diocese he can absolve the truly poor concerning past omissions of perpetual Masses and legacies, and can reduce perpetual burdens of Masses which for various causes and especially because of diminution of the revenues of legacies, or the poverty of those who are bound to fulfill the burdens, have been neglected in past years and will not easily be able to be fulfilled in the future.

How much may be accepted for the stipend of Masses? - It is licit to accept the stipend determined by diocesan law or custom. Trent sess. 22, Decree de observ., etc. - It is not licit to demand a greater stipend, unless from a just cause, e.g., some extraordinary labor; nor is it licit to accept less if this has been prohibited by the Ordinary. S. C. C., July 16, 1689; A. S. S. vol. 3, p. 558. Yet this does not prevent one from being able, from another title, from charity or friendship, to admit a smaller stipend, as also a greater stipend from the mere liberality of the giver. - Regulars also are bound to the diocesan tax, S. C. C., Jan. 15, 1639; July 16, 1689; May 8, 1905; and the heirs of those who left Masses with no determinate alms must observe it. Innocent XII, Const. Nuper, par. V, Posito. - "If beyond the alms taxed by the Bishop the priest about to celebrate demands more, he sins not only against the law of the Church, but also violates commutative justice." Benedict XIV, de Sacrif. miss., l. 3, c. 21, n. 13. - Trent sess. 25, chs. 4, 5 de R.; L. 319, 320; Lugo, Responsa Moralia, l. 5, disp. 18; A. S. S. vol. 38, p. 14; E. M.

Is it licit to collect stipends of Masses so that the Masses to be celebrated are then handed over to others? - Resp. If this is done for the sake of profit, it is forbidden, especially to merchants and booksellers, so that every occasion, appearance, and suspicion of base profit may be removed from the holiness of so great a sacrifice, although the collectors afterward take care that they are celebrated by poor priests, with books, religious and pious newspapers, etc., being given in place of the stipend, or spend for pious uses the profit which is taken from the exchange of books or merchandise with alms. If this is not done for the sake of profit, the matter per se is often dangerous, because often Masses of this kind must be celebrated at the established time, place, etc. Hence collectors sin gravely, and those also who confer stipends on them or accept them from them, as accomplices. Moreover, collectors are guilty of theft if they subtract anything for themselves beyond the just price of the office and labor. But this collection is explicitly and simply prohibited by the following Decrees of the S. C. C., not only because of gain and profit to be made, but also because of any other end whatever, although the best, unless it is that someone celebrate Masses, either through himself or through his subjects. Benedict XIV, Const. Quanta cura; S. C. C., Sept. 9, 1874; Apr. 24, 1875; L. 332; E. M.

Decree of the S. C. C., May 11, 1904. "That the celebration of manual Masses may be fulfilled with due solicitude, and that dispersions of alms and forgetfulness of assumed obligations may be avoided, the Congregation of the Sacred Council has established many things even in most recent times. But amid so great a mobility of affairs and fortunes in our age and with the growing malice of men, experience has taught that even greater precautions must be applied, so that the pious wills of the faithful may not be defrauded and a matter most grave among all may be carefully and holily guarded. For this reason the Eminent Fathers of the S. Congregation, after counsel had been taken more than once, judged that some things must be established, which our Most Holy Lord Pope Pius X carefully weighed, approved, and ordered to be published, as follows. "In the first place the Sacred Congregation declares that by manual Masses in the present Decree are understood and held all those which the faithful, with a manual offering made, ask to be celebrated, to whomever or in whatever way they hand over this offering, whether directly or in testaments, provided they do not constitute a perpetual foundation, or one such and so long-lasting that it must be regarded as perpetual. "Likewise counted among manual Masses are those which indeed burden the patrimony of some private family perpetually, but are established in no church, which Masses can be satisfied anywhere by any priests, at the discretion of the head of the family. "But after the manner of manual Masses are those which, established in some church or annexed to benefices, cannot for this or that reason be applied by the proper beneficed person or in the proper church; and therefore either by law, or with an indult of the Holy See, they must be handed over to other priests so that satisfaction may be made for them. "Now concerning all these, the S. Congregation decrees: "1. That no one can seek and accept more Masses than he can probably celebrate within the limits of time established below, and through himself, or through priests subject to him, if it concerns a diocesan Ordinary or a regular Prelate. "2. 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 lesser number of Masses. "3. That it is licit for no one to assume so many Masses that he probably cannot satisfy them himself within one year from the day of the obligation undertaken, always preserving nevertheless the contrary will of the offerers, who either explicitly or implicitly, because of some urgent cause, request a shorter time for the celebration of Masses, or grant a longer time, or spontaneously assign a greater number of Masses. "4. Since in the Decree Vigilanti of May 25, 1893, it was established 'that in the future all and each everywhere, beneficed persons and administrators of pious causes, or those in any way obliged to fulfill burdens of Masses, whether ecclesiastics or laymen, at the end of each year should hand over to their own Ordinaries the burdens of Masses which remain and for which they have not yet satisfied, according to the manner to be defined by them'; to remove ambiguities, the Eminent Fathers declare and establish that the time fixed by these words is to be taken in such a way that for founded Masses or those annexed to some benefice, the obligation of depositing them runs from the end of that year within which the burdens should have been fulfilled; but for manual Masses the obligation of depositing them begins after one year from the day of the burden undertaken, if it concerns a great number of Masses, or otherwise according to the diverse will of the offerers. "But concerning the entire and perfect observance of the prescriptions which have been established both in this article and in the preceding ones, the conscience of all whom it concerns is gravely burdened. "5. Those who have an overflowing number of Masses, concerning which they may freely dispose, without detriment to the will of founders or offerers as regards the time and place of the celebration of Masses, can assign them, besides to their own Ordinary or the Holy See, also to priests well-disposed toward them, provided they are certainly and personally known to them and beyond every exception. "6. Those who have handed over Masses with their alms to their own Ordinary or to the Holy See are relieved from every obligation before God and the Church. "But those who have handed over to others to be celebrated Masses accepted from the faithful, or in any way entrusted to their good faith, are held by the obligation until they have obtained proof of the completed celebration; so that if, from the dispersal of the alms, from the death of the priest, or from any other cause whatever, even accidental, the matter has fallen void, the one committing them must supply from his own goods and is bound to satisfy the Masses. "7. Diocesan Ordinaries, the Masses which by the disposition of the preceding articles they shall gather together, will immediately enter in order in a book with the respective alms, and will take care according to their strength that they be celebrated as soon as possible, yet so that first satisfaction be made for manual Masses, then for those which are after the manner of manual Masses. But in the distribution they will observe the rule of the Decree Vigilanti, namely: 'they will distribute the intentions of Masses first among priests subject to themselves whom they have known to need them; then they will commit others either to the Holy See or to other Ordinaries, or also, if they wish, to priests outside the diocese, provided they are known to them and beyond every exception,' the rule of article 6 concerning the obligation always remaining firm, until they have exacted from the priests proof of the completed celebration. "8. It is altogether forbidden to anyone to hand over to booksellers and merchants, to administrators of daily papers and periodicals, even if they are religious men, and also to sellers of sacred utensils and vestments, although they are pious and religious institutes, and generally to any persons whatever, even ecclesiastics, who seek Masses not specifically so that they may celebrate them either through themselves or through priests subject to them, but for any other end whatever, although the best, the obligations of Masses and their alms accepted from the faithful or from pious places. For it has been established that this cannot be done except by carrying on some kind of commerce with the alms of Masses, or by diminishing the alms themselves; and the S. Congregation judged that both must altogether be guarded against. Wherefore in the future, whoever shall presume to violate this law, either by knowingly handing over Masses as above or by accepting them, besides the grave sin which he will commit, will incur the penalties established below. "9. According to those things which have been established in the preceding article, it is decreed that, for manual Masses, the offering assigned by the faithful, and for founded Masses or Masses annexed to some benefice, which are celebrated after the manner of manual Masses, the proper alms according to the following articles, can never be separated from the celebration of Mass, nor changed into other things or diminished, but must be handed over to the celebrant whole and in its own species, declarations, indults, privileges, rescripts, whether perpetual or for a time, granted anywhere, under whatever title, form, or by whatever authority, and contrary to this law, being removed. "10. And therefore to sell or buy books, sacred utensils, or any other things, and to enter associations, as they call them, with daily papers and periodicals by means of Masses, is wicked and altogether prohibited. But this holds not only if it concerns Masses to be celebrated, but also if it concerns Masses already celebrated, whenever this turns into usage and habit and inclines to the support of some commerce. "11. Likewise, without a new and special permission of the Holy See, which will not be given unless true necessity has first been established and with due and opportune cautions, it is not licit to subtract anything from the alms of Masses which the faithful are accustomed to hand over to more celebrated Sanctuaries, so that provision may be made for their dignity and ornament. "12. But whoever shall have dared in any way or under any pretext to break the statutes in the preceding articles 8, 9, 10, and 11, if he is of the priestly order, will be subject to suspension a divinis, reserved to the Holy See and incurred by the fact itself; if he is a cleric not yet initiated to the priesthood, he will likewise be subject to suspension from the orders received, and moreover will become incapable of obtaining higher orders; but if he is a layman, he will be bound by excommunication latae sententiae reserved to the Bishop. "13. And since in the Constitution Apostolicae Sedis it was established that those are subject to excommunication latae sententiae reserved to the Supreme Pontiff who 'collect alms of a greater price and seek profit from them by causing Masses to be celebrated in places where Mass stipends are customarily of a lesser price,' the S. Congregation declares that nothing is detracted from this law and sanction by the present Decree. "14. Nevertheless, lest a sudden innovation be harmful to some pious causes and religious publications, it is granted that associations already entered into by means of Masses may be prolonged until the end of the year from which they were instituted. Likewise it is conceded that indults of reduction of the alms of Masses, which are found to have been granted to some in benefit of Sanctuaries or other pious causes, may remain in force until the end of the current year. "15. Finally, as regards Masses annexed to benefices, whenever they are handed over to other priests to be celebrated, the Eminent Fathers declare and establish that the alms must be no other than the synodal alms of the place in which the benefices were erected. "But for Masses founded in parishes and other churches, the alms which is assigned must be no other than that which in the foundation or in the subsequent indult of reduction is found to have been taxed perpetually, always preserving nevertheless rights, if there are any, legitimately recognized, whether for the fabric of churches or for their rectors, according to the Declarations presented by the S. Congregation in the Munich case of July 25, 1874, and in the Hildesheim case of January 21, 1898. "For in the Munich case, 'with attention to the fact that the alms of Masses of certain legacies partly hold the place of a parochial support, the Eminent Fathers judged it licit for the pastor, if he cannot satisfy them through himself, to commit those Masses to another priest, with the ordinary alms of the place assigned, whether for low or sung Masses.' And in the Hildesheim case it was declared that 'in legacies of Masses founded in some church, one can retain in favor of ministers and of those serving the churches that portion of revenues which at the beginning of the foundation, or in another legitimate way, was assigned to them independently of the special work to be performed for the fulfillment of the legacy.' "Finally, it will be the duty of each Ordinary to take care that in individual churches, besides the table of perpetual burdens and the book in which manual Masses handed over by the faithful are recorded in order with their alms, there also be books in which satisfaction for the said burdens and Masses is marked. "It will likewise be their duty to watch over the full and complete execution of the present Decree, which His Holiness orders to be observed inviolably by all, anything contrary notwithstanding."

An exchange of the alms of Mass with food and service is licit, provided that no more is retained than an honest compensation demands. S. C. C., Feb. 25, 1905; A. S. S. vol. 38, p. 20.

627 bis. Is transmission of Masses outside the diocese licit? - The following Decrees are held on this matter.

On the Satisfaction of Masses. - "In the recent Decree Ut debita of May 11, 1904, this S. Congregation, embracing various laws already issued before concerning the religious fulfillment of burdens of Masses, with opportune declarations added and a severe sanction interposed, strove to provide that the holiest matter of all be held in highest honor among all, and that the danger be removed lest anyone in any way detract anything from the pious wills of the faithful. Yet although these were the cares of the Apostolic See and the solicitude of the Bishops, abuses and violations of the law were not lacking, concerning which the same Sacred Congregation judged that the vigilance of Prelates should again be stirred up. "For indeed it is clear that not a few, notwithstanding the very well-known canonical prescriptions, by no means doubted to subtract something on their own initiative from the offering accepted for Masses, and, having retained for themselves part of the money, to commit the Masses themselves to others to be celebrated, perhaps led by the opinion that this was licit for them either because of the consent of the priest receiving with a more or less even mind, or because of the end of helping some pious work or exercising charity. "There were also those who, contrary to laws so often inculcated, especially contrary to n. 3 of the same Decree, adopted this kind of industry for themselves, that they gathered from everywhere the greatest number of Masses they could. From this it has more than once happened that an enormous abundance of them was heaped up in the hands of private men; and therefore it remained subject to danger, which indeed, even when human malice has been removed, always threatens matters entrusted to private faith. "Finally there were found those who, departing from the law expressed in n. 5 of the Decree, committed Masses to be celebrated, not only more abundantly than was licit to give to private persons, but also more inconsiderately, since they entrusted them to priests unknown to them, deceived by the appearance of some name or title, or moved by the recommendations of others who neither knew them plainly nor had sufficiently examined the gravity of the burden assumed. "That these disturbances of discipline may be met, and that the most grave harms which customarily follow the violation of the Decree Ut debita may be repelled as far as possible, this S. Congregation, carrying out the commands of our Most Holy Lord Pope Pius X, admonishes all Bishops and other Ordinaries to apply every care and vigilance in a matter of such importance, and to teach the clergy and administrators of pious legacies what dangers arise from the non-observance and contempt of the law; with what burden their conscience is weighed down; how rashly they place their own judgment before the laws which long experience of affairs has placed for the protection of the most august matter; finally, by what fault they bind themselves and to what penalties they become subject. "But for rooting out the evil radically, the Eminent Fathers further judged it necessary to add certain new things to the prescriptions hitherto made. Therefore, the matter having been discussed first in the Congregation of March 23, 1907, and again in the following Congregation of April 27, they established these things to be observed by all under a grave bond of conscience: "I. That in the future whoever wishes to commit Masses to be celebrated to priests, whether secular or regular, residing outside the diocese, must do this through their Ordinary, or at least after he has been heard and has assented. "II. That each Ordinary, as soon as it is permitted, make a catalogue of his own priests, and describe the number of Masses which each one is bound to satisfy, so that afterward he may proceed more safely in assigning Masses. "III. Finally, if any Bishops or priests should wish in the future to send Masses, of which there is an overflowing abundance, to Prelates or priests of churches which are situated in the East, they must always and in each individual case do this through the S. Congregation of Propaganda Fide. "All these things having been reported by the undersigned Secretary to the same Most Holy Lord in the audience of April 28, His Holiness held ratified and confirmed the deliberations of the Eminent Fathers and ordered them to be published, anything contrary notwithstanding. "Given at Rome on the 22nd day of May 1907." Letter of the S. C. C.

On the Transmission of Masses to the Eastern Churches. - "... III. Finally, if any Bishops or priests should wish in the future to send Masses, of which there is an overflowing abundance, to Prelates or priests of churches which are situated in the East, they must always and in each individual case do this through the S. Congregation of Propaganda Fide." S. C. C., Decree Recenti, May 22, 1907. "Apostolic Delegates are not comprehended in the preceding article 3 of the Decree Recenti of May 22, 1907, so that Mass intentions can be sent to the aforesaid Reverend Delegates with the respective alms, that they may distribute them only to Prelates and priests of their Delegation. Superiors of Orders and Religious Institutes can directly and specifically send Mass intentions with the respective alms to their own religious subjects, but not to the rest." S. C. C., May 22, 1907.

Alms of Masses to be celebrated by missionaries in Eastern regions, and everywhere, must be sent, as before, to the S. Congregation de Propaganda Fide, or also to Apostolic Delegates, who can hand them over only to their own prelates and priests; likewise to the Moderators of religious institutes, who will be able to send them on to their subjects, but not to others. S. C. C., Sept. 9, 1907. "1. If any wish to send Masses, of which there is an overflowing abundance, to Churches of the Eastern rites, they can do this not only through this S. Congregation, as is prescribed in the Decree Recenti of the S. C. C., May 22, 1907, but also through the Reverend Apostolic Delegates established in Eastern regions. In that case it is necessary to signify to them how many Masses and what sum of stipends must be handed over to Eastern Prelates existing within the scope of each Delegation. "2. It is in no way licit to send alms to laymen, who afterward distribute them to priests who will celebrate Masses. "3. Nor is it licit to commit the celebration of Masses directly to Eastern presbyters. "4. It is also forbidden to send alms directly to Superiors of Eastern Religious Congregations. "5. Indeed neither is it licit to commit Masses directly to Eastern Prelates who are either titular Bishops or simple Patriarchal Vicars. "6. But if it concerns Prelates having ordinary episcopal jurisdiction in the East, Mass intentions with the relative alms can be sent directly by Bishops and Priests to those Prelates themselves for the necessities only of priests subject to them, as the S. C. C. declared on March 18, 1908. But lest from several places at the same time many alms flow together into one and the same Diocese, which would bring with it an excessive delay in the celebration of Masses, therefore one who commits alms to some Eastern Prelate should also make the Apostolic Delegate of the region certain of the number of Masses, to whom it belongs to watch that the Masses be celebrated with the solicitude which is fitting." Instruction Cum plures, S. C. de Prop. Fide, July 15, 1908; Monit. Eccles. vol. 20, p. 439.

Can a priest to whom a rich stipend is offered for today's Mass, while retaining this, ask another priest to celebrate for him, promising to celebrate on the following day for the same person for whom the other is going to celebrate for the ordinary alms? - Resp. In the negative, if this is done often, or deliberately, namely by studied seeking of a richer stipend. For this bears before itself a certain appearance of trade and of base profit on the occasion of Masses. This is confirmed from S. C. C., May 6, 1865; A. S. S. vol. 2, p. 203; vol. 3, p. 98. - If it concerns some occurring case, it is controverted. "Concina rightly denies it," says St. Alphonsus 322, "because this could not be excused from the appearance of base commerce; nevertheless he rightly does not dare to condemn it of grave sin.... La Croix and Mazzotta affirm it, because this would not be retaining part of the price, which the Pontiff condemned, but only exchanging Masses and days." This latter opinion is altogether probable by the solidity of its reason and the weight of authority, and is approved by the very common practice of pious priests. Nor indeed is any prohibition of this case contained in the Decree Ut debita. Except, however, if the one giving the alms is reasonably and gravely unwilling that the Mass be celebrated by another. L. 321.

Is one bound by stipend to celebrate on a privileged altar for a deceased person required to read a Requiem Mass when the rite permits it? - Resp. This has been declared several times. S. R. C., Aug. 27, 1836, Rennes, ad 5. But now, after the Decree of the Holy Office of Feb. 19, 1913, a Requiem Mass, or a Mass of the feria or vigil with the proper prayer of the deceased, is no longer required. Yet this is laudably done, when it is licit and fitting for the sake of piety toward the deceased. - L. 339; E. M.

Does one bound by stipend to read a Requiem Mass, or a votive Mass, satisfy if he says another Mass? - Resp. In the affirmative. The reason is that the Mass is the same as regards substance; and if a just reason is present, there will be no sin. Except unless the quality of the Mass was strictly prescribed because of some peculiar reason. Hence, if the Rubrics do not permit that day a Requiem or votive Mass to be read, the Mass of the day must be read, and thus the obligation is truly satisfied by celebrating Mass conformable to the Office. S. R. C., Aug. 5, 1662; Mar. 3, 1761, ad 7; Apr. 23, 1875, de Venezuela; June 13, 1899, Plur. Dioeces., ad 4, n. 4031; L. 328, 422; St. Thomas 4, dist. 45, q. 2, a. 3, q. 1 ad 5; E. M.

It is not prohibited to apply a Requiem Mass for the living. Yet it cannot be applied for the living so that it may avail for them, not while living, but after their death.

Can a stipend be received for a Mass to be celebrated on the day of the Commemoration of all the faithful departed? And for the three Masses of the Nativity of Our Lord Jesus Christ? - Resp. To the first, in the affirmative. The reason is that not all priests are bound on this day to apply Mass for all the dead; indeed they are not obliged even to celebrate. Therefore they can apply Mass at will either for all the dead dwelling in Purgatory, or only for some. S. R. C., Aug. 4, 1663, n. 1275. But this being posited, nothing at all prevents a stipend from being accepted for the Mass. - L. 338.

Resp. To the second, in the affirmative. For this is prohibited by no special law.

Can priests of the Society of Jesus accept a stipend of Masses? - A priest of the Society can accept a stipend neither for himself nor for another for Masses which he reads. The same also must be asserted if it concerns any other sacred ministries whatever. This is clear from the Institute of the Society, Epitome Inst. Soc. Iesu, p. 2, c. 1, sect. 6, n. 27; p. 4, c. 2, sect. 1, n. 30. - If money is offered for Masses to a priest of the Society or to the Community, it can be admitted by the superior, not indeed with a rigorous obligation, but with a broad promise of saying some Masses, or even one or another each year from gratitude.

Likewise money can be accepted liberally, and in turn Masses can liberally be promised, yet so that the later promise is not as it were a compensation, or reciprocal payment as if for stipends, but the money is admitted under the mere title of alms; so that the offerer plainly understands that it cannot be accepted under another name, and that he himself gives it on this same basis. La Croix l. 4, n. 136 seqq.; l. 6, p. 2, n. 146; Lugo, Responsa Moralia, l. 4, disp. 30.

Resolutions: 1. A priest of the Society of Jesus, to whom money is offered for Masses to be read, can say to the offerer that he will read the Masses gratuitously for his intention, and in turn ask him that he be willing liberally to apply the offered money to this or that pious cause; thus the offerer will have a twofold fruit: namely, the ordinary fruit of the Mass, and then the fruit of cooperation toward that pious cause. - 2. Titius, a priest of the Society, can read Masses for the intention of Sempronius, a secular priest, who has accepted stipends for Masses to be read, when the latter can neither restore them nor satisfy for all the Masses, because in these circumstances Titius is judged to read gratuitously and from pure charity. - 3. If Titius, a priest of the Society, does not indeed receive the stipend, but nevertheless disposes concerning it, e.g., says to Caius: give the stipend to this poor man, and I will read the sacred rite for your intention; or if he says to Sempronius: you accept the stipend, and I will read the sacred rite in your place, he acts illicitly, because by thus disposing of the stipend through a certain tacit quasi-contract, "I do that you may give," he virtually accepts the stipend and gives it back to another; each of which is against the vow of poverty. - 4. If Paulus, a man of the Society, supplies for a chaplain bound from foundation in singing Mass, he by no means sins, although the chaplain receives his revenue, because he disposes concerning nothing. The same must be said if he preaches, or exercises another function for someone who receives the customary rights from it. - 5. If Sempronius, a pastor, having already accepted a stipend, asks Titius, a priest of the Society, to supply for him in reading Mass, Titius will licitly supply, provided he disposes nothing concerning the stipend. The reason is that the stipend is not received by Titius even virtually, since he disposes nothing concerning it, and it is altogether indifferent to him who gave the stipend by whom the Mass is read.

This is confirmed: If Titius, about to go to Paris, in favor of Sempronius, gratuitously carried letters which Sempronius had been hired for a wage to carry, Titius would certainly not act against poverty, nor would he be judged to acquire that wage for himself and donate it to Sempronius. Therefore similarly in our case. - La Croix l. 4, nn. 138, 139; l. 6, p. 2, n. 146.

What is the obligation in the Society of Jesus as regards Masses and prayers customarily enjoined? - Religious of the Society who do not pay the prescribed prayers and Masses, speaking per se, do not sin, because no rigorous precept is given; for there is no other obligation except from the rule, which per se does not oblige under sin. But superiors will sin if from negligence they do not take care that those be designated who celebrate Masses or pray, especially for benefactors and founders. But those who have Masses to be read read by others do not satisfy the rule, because it is a personal burden. Nevertheless, he satisfies who asks another to celebrate today or this week in his place, with himself compensating on another day or another week.

Likewise those satisfy who, foreseeing difficulties for the following week, anticipate the sacred rites in the week which precedes. - Masses enjoined for the dead of the Society, whether they are determined by the general Constitutions of the Order, or from particular rules, or from the prescription of superiors, introduce no other obligation than that of a simple rule or simple ordinance, and therefore they oblige neither under grave nor under light sin per se, a special precept always excluded. - Masses affixed to time, e.g., those which must be read each week or each month, if they could not be celebrated at this time because of impediment or illness, do not necessarily have to be supplied afterward, but can be omitted. On the contrary, if they were omitted from negligence, they must afterward be supplied. La Croix ib., n. 171. - If Masses or prayers are indicated for an indefinite time, it is enough to say them for two or three months. La Croix l. 6, p. 2, n. 168 seqq.; Pellizzarius tom. 1, tr. 5, c. 9, n. 12; Suarez, de Relig., tr. 10, l. 8, c. 2, n. 5.

9. "Does a priest, to whom an alms is given for celebrating a Mass for one or more deceased persons, or a votive Mass in honor of some Mystery of the Blessed Virgin Mary or of a Saint, satisfy his obligation by making the Mass conformable to the office, when otherwise the rite of the day does not permit the requested Mass, provided that he applies it according to the intention of the one giving the alms?"

R. It would seem that the proposed question should be answered negatively from the Decree of the S. R. C., Mar. 3, 1761, n. 2461: "On days on which private votive Masses or Masses of the dead can be said, a priest obliged to them by reason of a foundation or of an accepted manual stipend does not satisfy his own obligation by saying the Mass of the occurring day: for the express will of testators or petitioners, provided it be rational, must be fulfilled." The same negative response can be confirmed from another later Decree of the same S. R. C., Sept. 28, 1872, n. 3285.

Nevertheless, to the proposed question by a very recent Decree the S. R. C. itself replies: "Affirmatively; but it is more advisable that, as far as can be done, satisfaction be made to the intention of the one giving the alms by a Mass either of requiem or votive." S. R. C., June 13, 1899, n. 4031.

This obligation can be considered under a threefold aspect: 1. By reason of the priesthood. 2. By reason of office. 3. By reason of a stipend.

— 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.

— On Pious Foundations. 1. Notion. Pious foundations designate temporal goods given in any way to some moral person in the Church, with the perpetual or long-lasting burden of celebrating some Masses, or fulfilling other pious functions, or performing some works of piety or charity (c. 1544).

2. Acceptance of Burdens. The local Ordinary or major Superior of exempt religious defines norms concerning the dowry, or "capital," to be required and concerning the right distribution of fruits. His written consent is required for accepting a foundation; nor must he give it before it is legitimately certain that the moral person is able to satisfy both the new burden and the old ones (c. 1543).

3. Placement of Goods. The Ordinary or major Superior designates a safe place where the money and movable goods of the endowment are to be kept, until as soon as possible, after those whose interest it is and the council, whether diocesan of administration or of religion, have been heard, they are prudently placed fruitfully, according to the judgment of the Ordinary or Superior, with express and individual mention of the burden (c. 1547).

4. Documents of Burdens. One copy of the tables is to be kept safely in the archive of the moral person to whom it pertains, the other in the archive of the curia of the Ordinary or major Superior (c. 1548).

A little table of the burdens incumbent on the church from foundations is to be made and preserved in a safe place with the rector of the church. And besides the book deputed for inscribing manual Masses, another is to be preserved with the rector in which individual perpetual and temporary burdens, their fulfillment, and the alms are annotated, so that an exact account concerning all these can be rendered to the local Ordinary (c. 1550).

— Execution of Burdens. Concerning founded Masses, many things return which we said concerning the burden of a benefice. Therefore, as to the place, time, intention, and quality of the Mass, the will of the founder is to be observed. He who neglects it without just cause sins, and indeed gravely if he often does it, even if the heirs consent: for they themselves are held to executing the will of the testator. Yet Lugo does not estimate it mortal rarely and from a cause to celebrate in another church and at another altar than is owed. Indeed he does not seem to sin even venially who, obliged to daily celebration, rarely and from a reasonable cause celebrates elsewhere. But if he was obliged to celebrate at a privileged altar, he can omit this less easily without grave guilt, at least unless he compensates that either by personal privilege of the altar, or by application of a plenary indulgence. Yet by a plenary indulgence a privileged altar is compensated only imperfectly.

— Change of Burdens. But perpetual transfer from one altar or church to another cannot be made without an apostolic indult. But because an accidental change of the will of the testator, made for a reasonable cause, does not seem to exceed the power of a bishop, therefore they commonly judge that it is lawful for a bishop to concede a temporary transfer for a reasonable cause. Yet if there was a special cause for the testator to establish a certain hour or a certain altar, the bishop could not derogate from the will of the founder by dispensation (Ballerini-Palmieri, IV, 1030).

But Masses which at the end of the civil year within which they ought to have been celebrated have not been said are to be handed over to the Ordinaries, according to the manner to be defined by them (c. 841).

But the reduction itself of Masses is reserved to the Holy See by cc. 1517 and 1551.

We think that the many things which have been prescribed concerning this matter can be set forth summarily in this way.

— I. The Undertaking of the Obligation. These things are not lawful:

1. by celebrating several times in the day, to accept a double or triple stipend, except for the three Masses on the Nativity of the Lord; or by one Mass to satisfy an obligation of justice, such as a pastor has, and to say another for a stipend. For the other Mass only some remuneration from an extrinsic title is permitted (c. 824, §2), for example, of singing, of the hour, of a distant place. But it does not matter which Mass is said first;

2. to receive a stipend for a Mass which is already owed from justice (c. 825, 2° and 3°), or which in any way is applied to another first intention; but "as many Masses must be celebrated and applied as stipends, even small ones, have been given and accepted" (c. 828);

3. to retain an alms for a Mass applied before it has been requested (c. 825, 1°), unless the offerer, having been warned, ratifies the matter.

In this way we reconcile with the absolute prohibition of the Code the opinion admitted by St. Alphonsus, l. 6, c. 3, n. 337, and rejected by R. P. Cappello, op. c., I, n. 604, which permits that for a person already deceased, to whom it will profit to be aided more quickly by a Mass, a priest who foresees that a stipend is going to be offered may already offer the Mass and afterward receive the stipend. Yet if we wish to speak accurately, money given in this way will no longer have the character of a stipend of the Mass, but rather of a remunerative donation for the benefit received of Masses celebrated. Wherefore the offerer seems to have to be warned that he should ratify the matter;

4. to accept one stipend for the celebration alone, another for the application of the same Mass, "unless it is certain that one offering was offered for celebration without application" (c. 825, 4°);

5. to receive so many burdens of Masses to be celebrated personally that you cannot satisfy them within a year (c. 855).

Therefore he who can say within a year 300 Masses for a stipend is forbidden to bind himself to celebrating more than 300 Masses personally. Nor, since the law does not distinguish, does it matter if an option is given of saying them over several years. Yet the express consent of the offerers, who know the quantity of Masses already accepted, seems able to permit this: no injury is done to one who consents;

6. by means of stipends really, or even in appearance, to trade or conduct commerce (c. 827). What trading or commerce is was explained above, n. 21. Those devices have the appearance of trading which, although they do not fall under the strict definition of trading, nevertheless are imbued with the color of trading because of profit studiously sought from the collection and distribution or exchange of stipends.

For, since in every trading or commerce these two things are discerned: acquisition, and a profitable sale or quasi-sale intended through the acquisition itself, the very appearance of trading seems to require both elements at least in some imperfect way. Now the acquisition will be the studied collection of stipends, made in order to obtain profit from paying out or distribution, which will be a quasi-sale, although the proper character of gainful or artificial trading is in part lacking.

And so he trades by means of stipends who collects stipends of greater price so that, having obtained Masses with a smaller stipend, he may profit from them; or who collects stipends so that he may profit from the exchange of money. But he commits the appearance of trading who collects stipends so that, having obtained the consent of celebrants, he may be able to retain part for himself. He conducts commerce by means of stipends who collects stipends so that he may convert them into books which, with profit, he hands over to priests for money, or so that he may transfer them to another place where the use of a smaller stipend prevails. But if he hands over books without profit, still that collector of stipends commits the appearance of trading. These things, therefore, cannot be done without an indult of the Holy See.

But he who, from stipends not studiously collected, retains a part for himself or for a good work neither trades nor exercises commerce, although this is forbidden by a direct prohibition;

7. to demand a stipend beyond the tax established by the Ordinary or by custom, or, unless you are moved by reason of particular friendship or mercy, to be content with less, if the local Ordinary has forbidden smaller stipends to be accepted. For exempt religious themselves are held to observing these taxes and statutes.

It is lawful to increase the tax for an added extrinsic labor of singing, etc.

— II. The Gravity and Execution of the Obligation. 1. The priest must celebrate the Masses thus promised under grave obligation. Yet he who omits one out of a hundred promised for the same intention does not seem to Lehmkuhl, II, 269, 1, and Cappello, I, 668, certainly to sin gravely, because he lessens one series by a modest part; which, however, others do not admit.

There were also those who said that the obligation of one Mass is not grave if the stipend is not grave. And Ballerini, IV, 1012, does not judge this opinion improbable. In the appended note, Palmieri would rather gather the gravity from the precept of the Church, because, as he himself says, if it arose from contract, a small sum of money would have to be restored under grave obligation, which cannot be admitted. All these things seem to us to rest on a confusion by which the contract concerning the celebration and application of Mass is assimilated to sale. The obligation of celebrating one Mass is grave because the priest from justice has bound himself to a matter of great moment. Nor does one who violates the obligation have to restore a small sum of money under grave obligation, but to take care that the Mass be said.

2. The obligation does not cease even if, without fault of him who is burdened with the duty of celebrating, the alms already received have perished (c. 829). And this from natural law itself, as R. P. Arendt, S.J., lucidly proves in a special dissertation.

We restrict that severity to him who was held by a personal obligation of celebrating, by himself or through others. For this is general, that if someone, from another's onerous obligation, has obtained that to which he had a right, he must now execute his own obligation absolutely, in whatever way the profit received has perished.

But if there were question of one who was only a mandatary (of whom in c. 837), who merely had to transmit stipends and had never acquired the stipends, he would be held to nothing if those stipends had perished by a fortuitous event while with him. For these had not entered his patrimony; and the obligation of mandate must be said to cease by impossibility of execution.

3. He who accepts a sum for Masses to be said, the number of which was not defined, must compute his obligation according to the tax of the place in which the offerer was dwelling, "unless another intention of his is legitimately presumed" (c. 830).

4. Masses must be said at the time expressly prescribed; if it was not expressly prescribed, the celebrant must say as soon as possible the Masses whose cause urges; but others within a moderate time.

This can be estimated according to the rules of the decree Ut debita, May 11, 1904, so that one promised Mass ought to be said within a month, then for two Masses of the same intention three days beyond a month can be counted; ten Masses offered by the same person are to be completed within a month and a half; but six months are deputed for one hundred Masses to be said. All these things are to be taken not mathematically but morally.

But a delay of one or another month beyond the lawful time is considered grave.

5. The offerer is presumed to have requested only the application of the Mass; "yet if the offerer has expressly determined some circumstances to be observed in the celebration of the Mass, the priest, accepting the alms, must stand by his will" (c. 833).

And so in itself the priest is permitted to choose the quality of the Mass according to his devotion; yet the circumstances which he has tacitly admitted by receiving the alms he will have to observe. And many circumstances, for example, of a privileged altar, of black vestments, of a votive Mass, are such that, since they are not burdensome, they ought not to be compensated by a greater stipend. And although a Mass with black vestments or of the feria with the proper prayer of the deceased is no longer required for gaining the indulgence of a privileged altar, "nevertheless we are admonished by the decree of the Holy Office (Section on Indulgences), February 19-20, 1913, that this is laudably done, when it is lawful and fitting, for the sake of piety toward the deceased" (Periodica, VII, 121).

6. Toward the end of any year, whoever by any title are obliged to burdens of Masses are to hand over to their Ordinaries the burdens of Masses for which satisfaction has not yet been made, according to the manner to be defined by them (c. 841, §1). In Masses "after the manner of manual," the obligation runs from the end of the civil year within which the burdens ought to have been fulfilled; in manual Masses, after a year from the day of the burden undertaken, without prejudice to a diverse will of the offerers (c. 841, §2).

The diverse will of the offerers, when there is question not of Masses which, as Masses after the manner of manual, have proceeded from a pious foundation, but of manual Masses, could grant a time greater than a year; in which case the burdens will not have to be handed over. Masses after the manner of manual are made from founded Masses, because they can no longer be celebrated by the persons obliged, and are to be handed over to Ordinaries. But they admit that this time can be taken morally and that some Masses can be retained at the end of the year, lest a priest lack stipends (Cappello, op. c., I, p. 712).

7. Local Ordinaries and religious Superiors who entrust Masses to be celebrated to their own subjects or others must take care, as far as they are able, that they are celebrated as soon as possible (c. 844).

We interpret this canon, rather obscure, in this way. Since local Ordinaries and Superiors have many subjects to whom they entrust Masses, the faithful not rarely hand over a great number of Masses to them with that intention, that they may be celebrated more quickly than by individual priests. Yet nothing indicates that the lawful time is in itself to be defined otherwise. The same persons, besides, are accustomed at the end of the year to receive burdens for which the space of time has already elapsed. This is another reason for taking care that those burdens be fulfilled as soon as possible. Yet since they ought not to transmit the burden of these Masses to others, and so preserve too many to be fulfilled, they are merely warned that they "take care as far as they are able." For it can happen that, because of too great an abundance, the Masses cannot be discharged so quickly.

8. He who is held not indeed by the obligation of celebrating but of distributing Masses should distribute the Masses as soon as possible; but, unless something else is clear, the time of lawful celebration has its beginning from the day on which the priest about to celebrate them has accepted them (c. 837).

Here there is question of the administrator of a pious cause, or an heir or executor of a testament, who, as the first offerer, has Masses to be distributed; but not of him, for example, a Superior, who has already undertaken in himself the burden of celebrating by himself or through others. For it cannot be in this one's judgment that, by delaying distribution, he increase the lawful time.

— III. Transmission of the Obligation. 1. The severity of recent decrees, especially of the decree Recenti decreto, May 22, 1907 (Periodica, III, 138 or II-III, 322), having been moderated, the Code permits Masses to be handed over to well-regarded priests, whom either the transmitter himself has known to be "above every exception," that is, altogether worthy, or the testimony of their own Ordinary has commended (c. 838).

Those above every exception are the same as excellent persons, or those upon whom suspicion cannot fall. This is properly said of a witness who is eminently suitable (cf. Reiffenstuel, Ius can., II, 20, 10-11). Transmission permitted to approved priests is prohibited from being made to booksellers or merchants who collect alms of Masses and repay to priests not the money itself but books and other merchandise (cf. Sacred Congregation of the Council, September 9, 1874; decree Vigilanti studio, May 23, 1893). But it is not disapproved that stipends which abound be entrusted to a good priest to be distributed to poorer priests. But in order that they be handed over to a pious work, for example, an institute for spreading good periodicals, it is necessary that there be certainty about an indult by which either retention of part of the stipend, or exchange with religious newspapers, is permitted, although because of the appearance of trading or the dangers of abuses, these things were prohibited by the decree Ut debita of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, May 11, 1904.

But the bishop does not seem able by synodal statute to prohibit what c. 838 expressly permits, that Masses be handed over to other approved priests outside the diocese, nor to attach a condition unknown to common law, for example, the consent of the Ordinary "lest stipends be transferred outside the diocese." We say this about stipends of which priests have free disposition. For if there is question of stipends offered to a church, for example, a secular sanctuary which is a place of pilgrimages, the local Ordinary could use his jurisdiction in those churches to command that stipends accepted there not go beyond the boundaries of the diocese. But insofar as they are executors of pious wills (c. 1515), they can indeed impede those transfers which they judge imprudent or alien to the mind of the donor; yet they cannot directly prohibit stipends from being carried outside the diocese.

But sometimes, in an indult for the reduction of founded Masses, provision is made that Masses to be celebrated outside the diocese not be handed over beyond a third part; or bishops are permitted to forbid transfer beyond the disposition of the Code. Thus in the month of March 1922 the Sacred Congregation of the Council indulged to the bishops of the Netherlands that they could prohibit priests from transmitting Masses outside the diocese without their consent (cf. Periodica, XII, p. 37 ff.).

2. He who has handed over to another for celebration Masses committed to his faith remains obliged "until they have obtained testimony of the obligation accepted by the same persons and of the stipend received" (c. 839).

And so concerning the execution itself of a legitimately transferred obligation, contrary to what was provided by the decree Ut debita, no solicitude is now imposed by positive law upon him who transfers the burden.

3. Manual offerings are to be transmitted entire, "unless either the offerer expressly permits something to be retained, or it is certain that the excess above the diocesan tax was given with consideration of the person" (c. 840, §1). They are to be transmitted entire at least in this way, that the celebrant by the celebration acquires a right to the whole stipend.

Is this prescription of positive law alone, which, already from Urban VIII and Innocent XII, Constitution Nuper, December 23, 1697, was sanctioned, and afterward several times and now by c. 840, §1 is confirmed, or also of natural law? There are those who think that in itself it is lawful that you offer less, though a just stipend, to the priest, and retain the excess, because this is the common norm admitted concerning him who executes through another an obligation undertaken. Thus Busembaum himself in c. 3, dub. 1 De Eucharistia. Others think the same in itself lawful for a priest, but not for a layman transmitting, because in a priest, but not in a layman, the intention of the offerer is fulfilled, who was deputing the alms for the congruent support of a priest. Thus Suarez, Sacr., I p., d. 86, s. 3, toward the end. But this assimilation of one transmitting an alms with the executor of any obligation seems false to us. For he who offers the alms of a Mass to one accepting it by no means, at least in itself, simply says to him: "Take care that so many Masses be celebrated"; but he intends to join such an alms with the Masses which will be said. He admits no other title besides celebration by which that money can be kept. Nor does he destine it immediately to the support of the priest, but only through the mediation of celebration; that is, he does not give the money except as a stipend of a Mass. Nor is the thing indifferent; for from a more abundant alms he can hope for a better or more intense application of the fruit for himself (cf. Sacred Congregation of the Council, in the Cause of Montevideo and others, January 10, 1920, among the observations of the secretary, A. A. S., XI, 1920, p. 72). And so with the much more common opinion today, we hold that the alms is customarily offered in such a way that, already in itself, the distributor or priest who transfers the obligation undertaken to another can retain for himself no part of the stipend received by any title.

He who has secretly retained part of the stipend has sinned against justice and is held to restitution. Thus we say with St. Alphonsus, l. 6, n. 321, and we prove it both from the nature of the offense, which contains the malice of theft, and from the obvious sense of the decrees of the Holy See. Already Alexander VII condemned proposition 9: that a priest can satisfy through another "by conferring a smaller stipend on him"; and Benedict XIV, Constitution Quanta cura, declared that collectors of Masses who retained part of the stipend for themselves were not immune from theft. Wherefore at least concerning those who are not priests (for the collectors in themselves were not priests), the matter can no longer be doubted. Yet there were those who thought that the obligation of restitution is not certainly clear. Thus Ballerini, IV, 1017; more expressly Noldin, III, 191, and even now, Arregui, Summarium, n. 567, 5. But cf. the strong reasons, both historical and intrinsic, which R. P. Arendt opposes to these in the booklet De laesione iustitiae commutativae in missae manuali stipendio alteri celebranti diminuto (Prato, 1914). That injustice primarily injures the offerer himself of the stipend. Wherefore c. 840, §1 admits that it can be expressly permitted by the offerer that something be retained. Yet restitution can also be made to the celebrating priest; indeed to him occult restitution is to be made, so that the will of the offerer, not revoked, may obtain its effects.

But he does not violate justice who, by title of donation, obtains from the celebrant part of the stipend or even the whole stipend which he had to hand over. And in itself the matter stands the same whether the celebrant wished to offer the Mass gratis or for a partial stipend. Yet the danger of abuse is much greater in a partial donation than in a complete donation. Wherefore partial liberality could be prohibited where full liberality was admitted, and must be proposed and admitted more cautiously than complete liberality.

Canon 840 itself permits that the excess above the diocesan tax be retained if it is certain that the excess was given with consideration of the person, so that it is not a formal part of the stipend.

4. "In Masses after the manner of manual, unless the mind of the founder stands in the way, the excess is legitimately retained, and it is enough to remit only the manual alms of the diocese in which the Mass is celebrated, if the rich alms partly holds the place of the dowry of the benefice or pious cause" (c. 840, §2).

For the founder is judged not only to have prescribed Masses, but also to have wished to benefit the service of some church and therefore its beneficiaries. Yet the Code does not simply permit that the richer alms of a founded Mass be retained in part whenever Masses are celebrated elsewhere or by another than ought in itself to have been done, but attaches this condition: "If the greater alms is, as it were, a partial dowry of the benefice or pious cause." But then it does not require that the customary alms of the place where the Masses were founded be assigned, but declares it sufficient that the alms of the diocese where the Mass will be celebrated be paid. This can give place to cunning devices. Yet it does not seem able to be a frequent abuse.

— Corollaries or Scholia. It is helpful to illustrate the doctrine handed down by certain cases. In solving these, the rule of c. 827, concerning every appearance of trading to be kept away from the offering of Masses, must always be kept before the eyes, besides the principle of justice concerning fulfilling the will of the offerer.

1. It is lawful to ask another that he be willing to celebrate gratis and yield the whole stipend to the transmitter. Nor, because of a particular cause of consoling someone's affliction or of a good work, is a priest forbidden to ask part of the stipend from the celebrant, provided the concession is not made a condition without which the Mass would not be transmitted: for then the character of true liberality would be absent; and provided Masses are not collected with the mind of obtaining in this way parts of stipends: for then an appearance of commerce would be introduced.

2. Priests can exchange intentions of Masses among themselves, retaining their respective stipends even when unequal, since then each renounces the whole of the other's stipend, and abuse is more difficult. Yet a studied capture of a richer stipend would have to be reproved, namely if frequently, by seeking out rich stipends, you acquire profits of this kind for yourself.

3. A pastor who entrusts to another the singing of a Mass whose celebration is placed among parochial rights, for example, in the funerals of the dead, does not have to hand over to the celebrant except the customary alms for a Mass which is sung at such an hour; the rest he licitly retains as pertaining to stole fees.

4. He to whom Masses are legated, which the testator has taxed above the customary alms, if he fulfills the burden through another, can easily keep the excess by title of legacy.

5. But if Masses have been legated not to a definite priest, but to a church, the Sacred Congregation of the Council, June 25, 1874, judged that the alms, from the mind of the founder, cannot be separated from celebration. Much less will this separation be permitted if not even the church itself was determined: then it is clear that the testator wished favor to be given to the celebrant alone.

6. It is not lawful for rectors of churches to take anything from manual stipends by which provision may be made for the beauty and ornament of the church; the same is lawful for paying the expenses of celebration, if the Church has no other revenues destined to this end, provided as many Masses are celebrated as have been prescribed by the offerers. But from perpetual foundations it is lawful to deduct the expenses of utensils (cf. A. S. S., XXI, p. 299 ff.).

Nor does a rector of a church seem able to be prohibited from asking from outside priests who desire to celebrate in his church that they pay the expenses of celebration (cf. St. Alphonsus, l. 6, n. 322, end; d'Annibale, III, 190 [17]).

7. For churches which receive Masses in too great a quantity for them to be able to be celebrated there in due time, c. 836 sets down this rule: "The faithful are to be warned by a notice placed in an open and obvious place, that the Masses offered will be celebrated either there, when it will conveniently be possible, or elsewhere."

8. He who demands a greater stipend without a title of extrinsic labor or something similar is presumed in the external forum to be simoniacal; but in the internal forum he will be guilty of scandal, of a violated law obliging from religion, and also of injustice, since he asks beyond what is just (Bucceroni, II, p. 157), but not of the sin of simony unless he wished to sell sacred things, as if he asks more on account of a privileged altar or a miraculous place.

9. He who had promised Masses for a stipend is not in itself freed by occult restitution of the money, since the offerer of the stipend is nevertheless frustrated of the Masses to which he had acquired a right, nor is money equivalent to Masses. But either an occasion must be offered to the same person of obtaining Masses, or condonation must be obtained from the Holy See, which can supply the defect from the treasures of the Church.

— IV. Annotation of Masses. 1. The rector of any church or pious place in which alms of Masses are customarily received must accurately note, in a special book, the number, intention, alms, and celebration of the Masses received. And Ordinaries, whether of places or major Superiors of exempt clerical religions, must review books of this kind each year by themselves or through others (c. 843).

2. Moreover the local Ordinaries themselves and religious Superiors who entrust Masses to be celebrated to their own subjects or others must enter in order in a book the Masses which they have accepted with their alms. "Indeed all priests, whether secular or religious, must accurately annotate what intentions of Masses each has received and for which he has satisfied" (c. 844).

That this burden is a matter of conscience is evident in itself, lest because of our negligence we ourselves violate grave obligations, or, oppressed by some accident, prepare inextricable difficulties for successors.

— V. Penalties. By more than one earlier decree penalties latae sententiae were established. The Code does not confirm these; but it wills that those who have committed an offense against the prescription of c. 827, by which every appearance also of trading is kept away from the offering of Masses, or of c. 828, by which as many Masses are commanded to be celebrated and applied as stipends have been accepted, or of c. 840, §1, which commands that one transmitting Masses transmit entire the manual offerings of Masses accepted, be punished by their Ordinary according to the gravity of the fault, not excluding suspension, or deprivation of benefice or office, or, if there is question of laypersons, excommunication (c. 2324).

— VI. Indults. The Holy See can condone faults in the external forum and remit several obligations, since it can compensate not a few defects from the treasures of the Church.

For the same reason, it can in advance indulge certain things which otherwise would be prohibited, especially when it is not always clear that there is question of natural law. And when the prohibition is of positive law, its intervention bars the excesses whose danger is usually the cause of the law.

— VII. On Gregorian Masses and the Gregorian Altar. 1. In his Dialogues, l. 4, c. 55 (P. L., 77, 410 ff.), St. Gregory relates that on the thirtieth day the soul of the monk Justus, for whom he had commanded that the sacred rite be celebrated through thirty strictly continuous days, was freed from purgatorial flames. Hence there prevailed the pious use of the Gregorian thirty, which is subject only to these conditions: that in an uninterrupted series through thirty days Mass be offered by one or several priests for one and the same soul. Through thirty days, I say, so that on the Nativity of the Lord only one Mass can be computed for the same thirty. But not long ago, March 15, 1884 (A. S. S., XVI, 509), the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences affirmed that confidence concerning the special efficacy of Gregorian Masses is pious and reasonable. This efficacy is explained in Nouvelle Revue Theologique (t. 21 [1889], p. 121) by the special intercession of St. Gregory. Hence it follows that a priest derogates from an obligation of justice who, having undertaken the special burden of thirty continuous Masses, interrupts the same, unless he has done this from an indult of the Holy See, which can supply the defect. Thus an interruption of three days at the end of Holy Week does not stand in the way of the virtue of the thirty; thus by decree of May 26, 1918, the Sacred Penitentiary made the faculty that on June 29 of that year priests could interrupt the thirty in order to celebrate Mass for the intention of the Supreme Pontiff for peace. But, with the intervention of apostolic authority set aside, the priest who says disconnected Gregorian Masses deprives the offerer of the stipend of a reasonable hope of special fruit. But if, as usually happens, that burden has been compensated by a greater stipend, he keeps that increase for himself without title (cf. decree of the Holy Office, December 11, 1912 [A. A. S., V, 32-33]).

What, then, remains to be done by him who, distracted, has interrupted the series?

Although other counsels also are suggested, if the Gregorian thirty was to be executed from justice, as Gregorian, the truly secure way will be of having recourse to the Sacred Penitentiary. Yet Cardinal Gennari also thinks it sufficient that he take care that Mass be said at the Gregorian altar of the City, or at an altar privileged after the manner of Gregorian.

For they judge the special efficacy of thirty Masses to be connected likewise with one Mass which is said at the Gregorian altar which exists at Rome in the church of Monte Celio. For, besides the common character of a privileged altar, it is said to have a special power for the souls of purgatory, the persuasion concerning which, approved by the same decree of the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences, seems to bear the same explanation. You may say the same of Gregorian altars after the manner, which after the decree of the Holy Office, December 11, 1912, are no longer newly conceded (cf. Gennari, Questioni teologico-morali, n. 417).

— I. 1. From the present discipline, priests, as such, must celebrate several times in the year; and bishops and religious Superiors must take care that priests celebrate at least on individual Sundays and feasts of precept.

2. Because of the necessity of the Church, the proper Ordinary can prescribe celebration to a priest not impeded, by conferring on him an office with which celebration is required. The Supreme Pontiff and a religious Superior can impose the same directly and simply, or prescribe application.

3. Pastors must sometimes sacrifice for their sheep.

4. A beneficiary must celebrate and apply Mass so that he satisfies the letters of foundation.

5. A voluntary promise can oblige from religion, if it is a vow; from fidelity, if it is a simple promise; from justice, if it is a contract.

II. Founded Masses are those whose stipends are received from the revenues of foundations. But a foundation designates temporal goods given to some moral person in the Church with the perpetual or at least long-lasting burden of performing a pious work, for example, of celebrating Masses. The written consent of the local Ordinary or major Superior of exempt religious is required for a foundation to be accepted; the goods are first to be kept according to his prudent judgment and as soon as possible to be placed fruitfully. Copies of the documents are to be placed in the archive of the curia of the Ordinary or Superior and of the moral person to whom the foundation pertains. A little table of the burdens of the Church is to be kept with the rector; and the burdens to be fulfilled and fulfilled are to be annotated in a book for this. Burdens are to be executed accurately according to the will of the testator; nor can perpetual transfer of burdens from one altar or church to another, or reduction of Masses, be made without an apostolic indult. An accidental change of the will of the testator seems permitted to the Ordinary. Burdens remaining at the end of the year are to be handed over to the Ordinary.

III. A stipend, by which provision is made at least in part for the support of the minister, and which is not paid as the price of the Mass but as a real prestation in a legitimate contract, by which prestation having been performed, the priest obliges himself to the application of the Mass, is paid and accepted without the stain of simony.

To remove all avarice, 1. these things are forbidden: except for the three Masses on the Nativity of the Lord, on the same day to satisfy by one or several Masses an obligation of justice and of stipend; to retain a stipend for the application of a Mass before it has been requested, unless the offerer, having been warned, ratifies the matter; to accept one stipend for celebration alone, another for application, unless it is certain that the other was offered for celebration alone; to receive so many personal burdens that you cannot satisfy them within a year; by means of stipends really, or in appearance, to trade or conduct commerce; to demand a stipend beyond the established tax; or, against the prohibition of the Ordinary, to be content with less.

2. The obligation of celebrating from a stipend is grave; nor does it cease even if the alms received have perished while with him who is held by the burden of celebrating. For a sum received, Masses, unless something else is demonstrated, are to be said in that number which the tax of the place where the offerer was dwelling has defined. Masses are to be said at the time expressly prescribed; or as soon as possible, if the cause urges; and by him who undertook the burden of celebrating, always within a moderate time, so that for two Masses of the same intention, three days beyond a month can be awaited. An undue delay of one or another month is considered grave. The quality and place of the Mass to be said in themselves remain in the power of the celebrant. Ordinaries and Superiors who entrust Masses to others to be celebrated must take care, as far as they are able, that they are celebrated as soon as possible. They are also to be distributed as soon as possible by the distributor, especially since in itself the time of celebration begins from the distribution having been made. Toward the end of the year, the remaining burdens of Masses are to be handed over to the proper Ordinaries. For Masses which are celebrated after the manner of manual, that is, elsewhere and by others than the documents wished, since they draw their origin from a foundation, the civil year is considered in itself; for others, the year from the day of the burden undertaken, without prejudice to a diverse will of the offerers.

One obliged can transmit Masses to priests above every exception, even outside the diocese, unless, as regards Masses received in churches subject to him, the Ordinary has forbidden this (response of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, February 19, 1921); but the transmitter remains obliged until he has obtained testimony of the accepted obligation and of the stipend received. Except with the express assent of the offerer, manual offerings are to be transmitted entire; and he who has secretly retained part of the stipend has violated justice and must restore: thus the truer opinion. The excess which certainly was given with consideration of the person can be retained. In Masses after the manner of manual, in itself it is enough to remit the alms of the place where they will be celebrated, if the rich alms partly holds the place of a dowry.

3. Obligations of Masses and their execution are to be annotated accurately by all priests; and the books of the rector of a church are to be reviewed each year by the Ordinary, by himself or through another.

Those who offend are to be struck by grave penalties by Ordinaries. But the Holy See can condone faults and remit obligations which it has the means of compensating from the treasures of the Church.

He who, distracted, has interrupted the series of a Gregorian thirty should have recourse to the Sacred Penitentiary, unless he otherwise compensates or supplies the defect.

254. Principle. All pastors of souls are bound by divine law to apply Mass for their subjects sometimes, and by ecclesiastical law on certain days.

Explanation: 1. Who are pastors of souls. All those are considered pastors of souls upon whom, by reason of their office, the care of souls is incumbent, such as the Supreme Pontiff, residential bishops, abbots nullius, superiors of an exempt clerical religious institute, pastors, quasi-pastors, and any who are deputed by competent authority to discharge by office the function of a bishop or pastor, such as the administrator of a diocese (but not the vicar general), or the administrator of a parish when the pastor is deceased or impeded. Since religious superiors are true pastors of their subjects, and this in a more perfect manner than pastors, there seems to be no doubt that they are bound by divine law to apply Mass for their subjects sometimes. But even today common ecclesiastical law has not determined the days on which they are obliged to apply Mass. Since titular bishops do not have a flock committed to them, they are not indeed strictly bound to the application, "but nevertheless, if account is taken of episcopal equity and charity, it cannot but seem fitting that they also sometimes offer sacrifice, so that God may look upon the miserable condition of those Churches by whose title and name they themselves are honored."³³³ What has been said of titular bishops does not apply to vicars apostolic and prefects of missions, since they are true Ordinaries. Therefore these are sometimes bound to apply Mass for the flock committed to them, as will be said below. Whether so-called military pastors, or pastors of soldiers, are bound depends upon particular law. In Spain the military clergy are not bound.³³⁴ In the Eastern Church pastors of souls are indeed obliged to apply Mass for the people, but they are not strictly bound to the days determined in the Western Church.³³⁵

³³³ Thus Leo XIII, Constitution In suprema, June 10, 1882; cf. Code of Canon Law, c. 348, § 2.

³³⁴ Sacred Congregation of the Council, May 22, 1909 (Acta Apostolicae Sedis I, 554).

³³⁵ Cf. Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, March 23, 1863, and November 8, 1882.

255. 2. Obligation by divine law. Divine law binds all pastors of souls sometimes to say and apply Mass for the flock committed to them.

"For every high priest taken from among men is appointed for men in those things that pertain to God, that he may offer gifts and sacrifices for sins."³³⁶ Wherefore the Council of Trent³³⁷ says in express words: "Since by divine precept it has been commanded to all to whom the care of souls is committed to know their sheep, to offer sacrifice for them...." Indeed, even the natural law itself commands that a pastor of souls, by force of the contract entered upon and the office received, foster and procure to the extent of his powers the spiritual salvation of his sheep. But this seems to be impossible unless the faithful from time to time assist at the sacrifice of the Mass and receive not only its general fruits but also its ministerial fruits. Therefore a pastor of souls, from the very nature of his office, is bound sometimes to say Mass for the flock committed to him. Although pastors of souls are bound by divine law to apply Mass sometimes for their faithful, nevertheless it has been established by ecclesiastical law alone when this application is to be made and under what conditions this obligation is incumbent.

³³⁶ Heb. 5:1.

³³⁷ Session 23, c. 1, on reform.

256. 3. Obligation by ecclesiastical law. Ecclesiastical law has issued particular statutes concerning pastors of souls, who are: 1. residential bishops and capitular vicars;³³⁸ 2. abbots nullius;³³⁹ 3. vicars and prefects apostolic;³⁴⁰ 4. pastors;³⁴¹ 5. quasi-pastors.³⁴²

Days of application. a) The days on which residential bishops, capitular vicars, abbots nullius, and pastors must apply Mass for the people are all Sundays and the following feast days:³⁴³ 1. the Nativity of the Lord; 2. the Circumcision; 3. the Epiphany; 4. the Resurrection of the Lord, with the two following days; 5. the Ascension; 6. Pentecost, with the two following days; 7. the Most Holy Trinity; 8. Corpus Christi; 9. the Finding of the Cross; 10-14. the Purification, Annunciation, Assumption, Nativity, and Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary; 15. the Dedication of St. Michael; 16. the Nativity of St. John the Baptist; 17. Saints Peter and Paul; 18. St. Andrew; 19. St. James; 20. St. John the Evangelist; 21. St. Thomas the Apostle; 22. Saints Philip and James; 23. St. Bartholomew; 24. St. Matthew; 25. Saints Simon and Jude; 26. St. Matthias; 27. St. Stephen the Protomartyr; 28. the Holy Innocents; 29. St. Lawrence, Martyr; 30. St. Sylvester, Pope; 31. St. Joseph; 32. St. Anne, Mother of Mary; 33. All Saints; 34. the patron of the kingdom; 35. the patron of the place.

Since many of these feasts are suppressed today, if any of them, impeded by a feast of higher rite, is transferred to another day, the application is then no longer obligatory on the day of transfer.³⁴⁴ Hence, for example, if the feast of St. Matthias, falling on the First Sunday of Lent, is transferred to another day, the pastor is not bound to apply Mass for the people on this other day. If these feast days are celebrated on a Sunday, the pastor can then satisfy the twofold obligation with one Mass; likewise if these feasts are transferred by pontifical indult to a Sunday, as, for example, in Germany the feast of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary is always transferred to the following Sunday. But if only the external solemnity of the feast is transferred to a Sunday, and not the Office of the feast, then the application must be made both on the feast day and on the Sunday. Likewise the obligation of applying does not cease although the solemnity of the feasts has been suppressed,³⁴⁵ even by particular law.^345a

b) The days on which vicars and prefects apostolic and quasi-pastors must apply Mass for the people are eleven, namely, the feasts of the Nativity of the Lord, Epiphany, Easter, Ascension, Pentecost, Corpus Christi, the Immaculate Conception and Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, St. Joseph, Spouse of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Saints Peter and Paul, and All Saints.³⁴⁶

A bishop who presides over two dioceses is not bound to apply two Masses;³⁴⁷ it suffices, therefore, that he apply one Mass for the whole people committed to him. A pastor who administers several parishes likewise must apply only one Mass on the prescribed days.³⁴⁸ Wherefore all contrary statutes have now been revoked. If, however, these different parishes have different patronal feasts, the pastor must apply Mass on the feast of the patron of each parish.^348a

³³⁸ Code of Canon Law, c. 339. Bishops are not bound to apply Mass for their subjects after election or confirmation in consistory, but after taking possession. Capitular vicars, during a vacancy of the see, are bound to the application just as bishops are. Code of Canon Law, c. 440.

³³⁹ Code of Canon Law, c. 323.

³⁴⁰ Ibid., c. 306.

³⁴¹ Ibid., c. 466, § 1.

³⁴² Ibid., and c. 306.

³⁴³ Thus from Urban VIII, Constitution Universa per orbem, September 13, 1642; Clement XI, Constitution Commissis nobis, December 6, 1708; Pius IX, Constitution Amantissimi Redemptoris, May 3, 1858; Sacred Congregation of the Council, December 18, 1919, and March 16, 1920 (Acta Apostolicae Sedis XII, 42); cc. 323, 339, 440, 466.

³⁴⁴ Sacred Congregation of the Council, December 15, 1913 (Acta Apostolicae Sedis VI, 9). Cf. Code of Canon Law, c. 339, § 3.

³⁴⁵ Sacred Congregation of the Council, August 8, 1911 (Acta Apostolicae Sedis III, 391).

^345a Sacred Congregation of the Council, July 19, 1930 (Acta Apostolicae Sedis XXII, 521).

³⁴⁶ Code of Canon Law, c. 306.

³⁴⁷ Ibid., c. 339, § 5.

³⁴⁸ Ibid., c. 466, § 2.

^348a Sacred Congregation of the Council, November 12, 1927 (Acta Apostolicae Sedis XX, 87).

257. Note. When pastors of souls must apply Mass for their subjects, they can accept absolutely no stipend, not even for another Mass which they may perhaps celebrate by virtue of the faculty of bination. Thus by common law.³⁴⁹ By a special indult of the Holy See, however, the acceptance of a stipend for the other Mass is sometimes permitted, and even commanded, to be expended for certain pious causes.

³⁴⁹ Code of Canon Law, c. 824, § 2.

258. 4. The quality of the obligation. The pastor's obligation of applying Mass is:

a) Grave. Neither contrary custom, nor illness, nor poverty exempts from this obligation. Thus all authors.³⁵⁰

b) Personal. Therefore the pastor of souls is bound himself to apply Mass for his subjects, unless there is a legitimate impediment, for example illness, in which case he must apply it through another priest.³⁵¹ He is not, however, bound to sing Mass, but it suffices to say a private Mass.³⁵² When a pastor is legitimately absent from the parish, he can apply Mass for the people either personally in the place where he is staying, or through the priest who acts in his place in the parish;³⁵³ nevertheless, it seems better that he personally, and not through his substitute, apply Mass for the people. The reason is that, just as the sacrifice of the Cross was accomplished by Christ Himself, the Pastor of all, so it is very fitting that the pastor who acts in the place of Christ the Pastor should himself apply the fruits of the sacrifice to his subjects.

c) Local. It is very fitting that Mass for the people be said in the parish church or in another place where the faithful can assist.³⁵⁴ The reason is evident.

d) To be fulfilled on the appointed days, namely, those indicated above in n. 256. If there is a legitimate cause, for example, if a funeral Mass or a Mass for bride and bridegroom is to be said, the local Ordinary can permit the pastor to apply Mass for the people on a day other than that on which he is bound by law.³⁵⁵ This permission indeed seems also capable of being presumed in a particular case. If, in some diocese, on suppressed feast days, the Mass for the people is to be applied by an indult of the Holy See according to the mind of the bishop, it can be tolerated that the pastor have the Mass to be applied celebrated, not on the very day on which he would be bound, nor personally, but through another priest, to whom the pastor must give a stipend. Thus the Sacred Congregation of the Council, December 16, 1914.^355a

³⁵⁰ Ibid., c. 339, § 1.

³⁵¹ Ibid., § 4.

³⁵² Sacred Congregation of Rites, December 20, 1864 (Decr. auth., n. 3128).

³⁵³ Code of Canon Law, c. 466, § 5.

³⁵⁴ Ibid., § 4.

³⁵⁵ Ibid., § 3.

^355a Acta Apostolicae Sedis VII, 27.

365. The obligation of celebrating by divine law arises from pastoral office. - The divine precept gravely obliges all pastors of souls, namely those who have undertaken a pastoral office, not only to celebrate on certain days, but also to apply the sacrifice for the people, i.e., for the sheep committed to them.

This obligation is contained in the pastoral office itself (Hebr. V, 1), which office is of divine law; whence the Council of Trent says that by divine precept it has been commanded to all to whom the care of souls has been committed to offer sacrifice for their sheep (sess. 23, de ref., c. 1). Bishops are held to this by absolute divine law, because they are of divine institution; pastors and other shepherds by hypothetical divine law, if they are instituted as pastors by the Church.

The obligation arises from justice, because to it, as to other pastoral offices, pastors are held from a quasi-contract; to what precisely they are obliged, divine law prescribes in a general and abstract way, but it must be determined in the concrete by ecclesiastical law.

366. To what pastors are bound. - I. The Supreme Pontiff is bound by divine law alone, but not by ecclesiastical law, and therefore only sometimes is he bound to celebrate Mass or apply it for the sheep.

II. Diocesan bishops, abbots or prelates nullius, capitular vicars while the see is vacant, apostolic administrators permanently constituted, pastors whether secular or religious, and vicar-administrators constituted in a vacant parish, are bound, from the taking of possession, to celebrate Mass for the flock on Sundays and feasts of precept, even suppressed ones (can. 339, § 1 and 466, § 1; Commission for Interpretation, Feb. 17, 1918, and S. C. C., Dec. 28, 1919).

Vicars general, titular bishops, coadjutors or auxiliaries, regular prelates, substitute vicars and coadjutors, and a fortiori assistant vicars or chaplains, are not strictly obliged.

III. Vicars and prefects apostolic, and quasi-pastors, from the taking of possession are bound to apply Mass for the flock only on eleven feast days of precept (can. 306).

367. Observations. - 1. If a feast day falls on a Sunday, one Mass satisfies the obligation (can. 339, § 2).

2. If a feast is transferred in such a way that on the day to which it is transferred not only the office with the Mass of the transferred feast is done, but also the obligations of hearing Mass and abstaining from servile works are kept, the Mass for the people must be applied on the day to which it is transferred; otherwise on the day from which it is transferred (can. 339, § 3).

3. A bishop or pastor who rules two or several dioceses, or several parishes, equally principally, or who, besides his own diocese or parish, has another or others in administration, must apply only one Mass for the peoples committed to him (can. 339, § 5 and 466, § 2). This also holds for a vicar-administrator who rules several parishes during vacancy (Commission for Interpretation, July 14, 1922). But if the feasts of the patrons of one and the other parish occur on different days, on each feast day the application must be made (S. C. C., Nov. 12, 1927).

368. The mode of fulfilling the obligation. - The obligation of applying for the people is real, personal, local, and affixed to the day.

1. Real, so that a pastor who from a just cause is impeded from applying must satisfy the obligation through another or on another day, and one who has omitted the application is bound to apply as soon as possible (can. 339, § 4 and 6).

Let it be noted that no cause excuses from celebrating Mass for the people, nor an immemorial custom; except for a dispensation of the Supreme Pontiff in a particular case.

2. Personal, so that the pastor is bound to apply by himself personally, unless he is legitimately impeded (ibid.). A legitimate impediment is infirmity, the obligation of celebrating a conventual Mass, if the pastor is at the same time a canon, or legitimate absence (can. 466, § 5), or anything else, provided that it is judged grave.

The S. C. C. declared that, for a pastor to be excused, a just cause is not: a) a contrary custom; b) funerals to be celebrated; c) a Mass for spouses to be said; d) a Mass founded for a certain day, which falls on a feast day of precept; e) the persuasion of the faithful who think that the solemn parish Mass with chant and explanation of the Gospel is always applied for the people and therefore gladly flock to it. Thus in itself and unless some other grave inconvenience is added.

3. Local, so that the Mass for the people is said in the parish church, that the people may be able to be present at it, unless the circumstances of things require or suggest otherwise (can. 466, § 4), for example if there is a feast in a filial church, or if it is a matter of mere supplying of an omitted Mass.

The local obligation exists for pastors, but not, as is clear, for bishops, who can celebrate for the flock anywhere. But if the pastor is legitimately absent, at his choice either he himself in the place where he is staying, or another for him in the parish church, can apply (can. 466, § 5).

4. Affixed to the day, so that without necessity the application cannot be transferred to another day; unless the Ordinary of the place permits this for a just cause (can. 466, § 3).

A just cause can be a funeral Mass, a Mass for spouses, on the anniversary day of death or burial, or for an urgent public cause.

It is not required that the Mass which is applied for the people be solemn, sung, or the parish Mass itself; the obligation is fulfilled even by a private Mass.

369. Observations. - 1. One who fulfills the obligation as to substance, but does not observe the due mode, unless it is done frequently without a just reason, sins only lightly.

2. In certain dioceses by indult it is permitted that on suppressed feast days Mass not be applied for the people, but according to the mind of the bishop or for a stipend to be handed over to him for pious works. In this case it is now permitted that pastors satisfy this obligation not on the very day on which they are bound, nor by themselves, but through another priest (S. C. C., Dec. 16, 1914).

3. It is granted to poor pastors that, if on a feast day a rich stipend is offered, the Mass can be said according to the intention of the offerer, the application for the people being transferred to another day (Benedict XIV, Const. Cum semper, Aug. 19, 1744).

We shall deal, in a twofold article, with the celebration of Mass, and we shall treat: 1. concerning the obligation of celebrating; 2. concerning the things required for celebrating rightly.

The obligation of celebrating can arise from various titles, of which three are commonly numbered, namely: 1. the priesthood itself; 2. the office committed to the priest; 3. the stipend accepted from the faithful. Now concerning each, several things.

1602. Christ "commanded His Apostles and their successors in the priesthood that they should offer, by these words: Do this in commemoration of me, as the Catholic Church has always understood and taught."⁹ Therefore it is of faith that a precept of sometimes celebrating was imposed by Christ on the universal priestly Order.¹⁰ But whether this precept extends itself also to individual priests is disputed among the Doctors. Wherefore let there be the following:

1603. Questions. Q. 1. Whether individual priests, by reason of the Order received, and independently of any other title whatever, are held UNDER GRAVE obligation sometimes to celebrate?

Resp. 1. Some deny, scandal being excluded, which nevertheless they say is easily had if a priest abstains from celebrating for a long time, say for six or eight months. Wherefore, at least by reason of this danger, that opinion must scarcely be called practically probable.

Resp. 2. The far more common and more probable opinion affirms that individuals are held both by divine law and by ecclesiastical law. - The DIVINE precept is gathered from the words of Christ: Do this, etc., since no probable reason is present for restricting the precept to the priestly Order in general. Likewise from the words of the Apostle: "For every Pontiff... is appointed... that he may offer gifts and sacrifices for sins." But the ECCLESIASTICAL precept is proved from cap. Dolentes 9, de celebr. Miss., where Innocent III vehemently reprehends priests "who scarcely celebrate the solemnities of Masses four times in the year."¹¹ St. Thomas gives the reason of this opinion, saying:¹² "Each one is held to use the grace given to him, when it has been opportune, according to that (2 Cor. 6): We exhort you that you not receive the grace of God in vain. But the opportunity of offering Sacrifice is attended not only by comparison to the faithful of Christ, to whom it is necessary to minister the Sacraments, but principally by comparison to God, to whom, by the consecration of this Sacrament, Sacrifice is offered. Whence to a priest, even if he does not have care of souls, it is not licit altogether to cease from celebration."

Q. 2. How often IN THE YEAR is each priest held to celebrate?

Resp. 1. Under grave obligation each one is held to celebrate only three or four times in the year, namely on the more solemn Feasts, as the far more common opinion affirms. - Indeed, many say that it suffices if the priest celebrates three or four times in the year, on any days whatever, provided due distance is observed, so that he does not abstain beyond six or eight months. And this opinion is conformable to the decree of the S. C. Conc., issued in the month of November 1696, where it is said: "One who, without a just cause, has not celebrated three or four times in the year, sins mortally, and can be punished by the Bishop."¹³

Yet others require more, and say that all priests are obligated to celebrating on individual Sundays and Feasts, especially the more solemn. But on account of the mere probability of this opinion, a strict precept cannot be asserted.

Resp. 2. Under light obligation priests are held to celebrate MORE OFTEN; as is gathered from these words of Trent: "Let Bishops care that these, that is, priests, celebrate Mass at least on Sundays and the more solemn feasts." Wherefore, says St. Alphonsus, "I would not know how to excuse from light fault that priest who could celebrate daily, with one day of the week excepted on account of reverence, and without any just cause, but only on account of sloth, abstained from celebrating. For the priest celebrates not only for himself, but also for the good of the whole Church and of the Christian people, whose minister and intercessor he has been constituted, according to that of the Apostle: Every Pontiff, etc."¹⁴

Let the words of the Seraphic Doctor be carefully weighed by the priest, especially by the scrupulous one: "The priest who DOES NOT CELEBRATE," he says, "as much as is in him, deprives the Trinity of praise and glory, Angels of joy, sinners of pardon, the just of help and grace, those existing in Purgatory of refreshment, the Church of Christ of spiritual benefit, and himself of medicine and remedy against daily sins and infirmities."¹⁵

By reason of the office which they have undertaken, all Pastors of souls are held not only to celebrate Mass, but also sometimes to apply it for the people. - That this twofold obligation may become better known, let there be the following:

1604. Principles. I. All pastors of souls are held, and indeed under grave obligation, to CELEBRATE Mass on individual Sundays and feasts of precept. - For the obligations of the people and of the pastor are correlative; whence on those days on which the people are held to hear Mass, on the same days the pastor also is held to celebrate it, as is had from Trent, saying: "But if they have care of souls, let them celebrate Masses as frequently as they may satisfy their office."¹⁶ But if someone is legitimately impeded, he is held to supply through another, lest the people lack Mass.¹⁷ By accident, the pastor is held to celebrate also on days other than the aforesaid, for example if the necessity of consecrating urges for ministering Viaticum; likewise if, on the occasion of the nuptial blessing or of funerals, the faithful reasonably ask. For the Ritual itself insinuates that these be performed with Mass accompanying. Nor, however, is he held to apply the fruit of the Sacrifice, unless he accepts a stipend. Thus the Holy Office, September 1, 1841.

1605. II. All pastors of souls, similarly, under grave obligation, are held to APPLY Mass FOR the people on individual Sundays and feasts of precept. - This is clear from Trent,¹⁸ saying: "Since by divine precept it has been commanded to all to whom care of souls has been committed, to know their sheep, to offer Sacrifice for them, etc." Therefore the obligation of celebrating for the people is OF DIVINE LAW, according to that John 21:17, Feed my sheep; but the Church has defined more accurately to whom this obligation extends itself, on what days it urges, and how it is to be fulfilled. These things must now be investigated singly.

1606. Questions. Q. 1. WHO are the PASTORS of souls upon whom the obligation of applying for the people is incumbent?

Resp. 1. They are: 1. Bishops, after possession of the See has been obtained,¹⁹ administrators, or others marked by whatever title, who actually preside over a canonically erected diocese. Nor indeed are Capitular Vicars, the See being vacant,²⁰ or Vicars General held to this. - 2. Abbots having quasi-episcopal jurisdiction over clergy and over people with a separate territory.²¹ - 3. Pastors, whether secular or regular; whether removable or irremovable; whether they have suitable support or do not have it; although immemorial custom to the contrary were present, as Benedict XIV declared.²² 4. All those functioning in place of a pastor, such as both vicars-curate, to whom care of souls is so committed that habitual care remains with another, for example at Rome in St. Mary Major with the Chapter; and vice-pastors, or vicars, who, the parish being vacant, are deputed to preside over it.²³ But if someone has two distinct parishes,²⁴ or if a Bishop exercises the office of pastor, he is held to apply a twofold Mass.²⁵ Otherwise, however, if a Bishop rules two dioceses.

Resp. 2. Immune from this burden are priests who have only secondary or subsidiary care, as chaplains or cooperators of the pastor,²⁶ chaplains of Nuns,²⁷ chaplains of hospitals, colleges, and other places of this kind.²⁸ Likewise, titular Bishops are not bound by this law; nor Apostolic Vicars or missionaries, "provided it does not concern places in which episcopal Sees and parishes have already been canonically erected, and to which the Apostolic Vicar and missionaries have been sent to perform the functions of legitimate pastors." Thus the S. C. de Prop. Fide, March 23, 1863.²⁹

Q. 2. Which are the FEAST DAYS on which pastors of souls are held to apply for the people?

Resp. They are all those which are numbered in the list of Urban VIII (cf. n. 654, q. 3),¹ as is clear from the Constitution Amantissimi Redemptoris,² in which Pius IX brings forward these things: "By these letters we declare, establish, and decree that pastors and all others actually exercising care of souls ought to celebrate and apply the sacrosanct Sacrifice of the Mass for the people committed to them, both on all Sundays and other days which are still observed from precept, and also on those which, from the indulgence of this Apostolic See, have been removed and transferred from the number of feast days of precept, just as the curators of souls themselves were bound when the mentioned Constitution of Urban VIII flourished in its full vigor, before feast days of precept were diminished and transferred.... This one thing we except, namely that when the divine Office has been transferred together with the solemnity to Sunday, only one Mass for the people is to be applied by the pastor."³ Likewise, satisfaction is made by one Mass if the feast falls on a Sunday.

It is said Office together with the solemnity; for, if the solemnity alone is transferred, for example according to the privilege conceded to France and Belgium with respect to the feasts of Epiphany, Corpus Christi, Saints Peter and Paul, and the Patron of the place, and in several dioceses also with respect to the feasts of the Purification, Annunciation, Nativity, and Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mass for the people ought to be applied on the very day on which the Offices of the aforesaid Feasts are commonly recited in the Church, as is clear from various decisions of the S. C. of the Council.⁴

Q. 3. HOW must the obligation of celebrating for the people be satisfied?

Resp. Pastors of souls are held to fulfill this obligation:

1. On the established days, unless legitimate dispensation has intervened. In the Bull Cum semper, Benedict XIV conceded to Bishops the faculty of dispensing with pastors laboring under grave poverty, that on feast days they can apply for those giving a stipend to them, yet with the burden of celebrating on another day for the people. - But for a broader Indult, if grave reasons are present, recourse must be had to the S. Congregation OF THE COUNCIL.⁵

2. In the established place, namely in the parochial church, as is clear from various declarations of the S. C. of the Council.⁶ Nevertheless it has been declared:⁷ "A pastor legitimately absent on a feast day satisfies his obligation by applying Mass for his people in the place where he is staying; provided that another priest celebrates in the parochial church for the necessary convenience of the people, and explains the word of God." Nor indeed is it required that a solemn Mass be applied; a private Mass suffices.⁸

3. Through themselves; because it is a personal obligation, as the S. C. C. declared on September 25, 1847, in Mechlinien., doubt 4.⁹ Therefore contrary custom cannot, but only a canonical cause can, furnish a sufficient reason that they may be able to celebrate through another. But a canonical cause is judged to be: 1. grave infirmity; 2. legitimate absence; 3. obligation of singing the conventual Mass;¹⁰ 4. dispensation of the Superior. - But the celebration of a funeral Mass, although the corpse is present, is not a sufficient cause which can exempt from the personal burden.¹¹ Yet for suppressed feasts, of which no solemnity remains among the people, particular Indults are sometimes conceded, by force of which it is licit to remit the parochial Mass to the following day, if obsequies occur with the body present, or buried the day before, the blessing of spouses, etc.¹²

4. Those legitimately impeded are held to celebrate through others, because the obligation is not only personal, but at the same time real.¹³ Wherefore the S. C. C. declared: "A pastor in any way legitimately impeded from celebrating Mass is held to have it celebrated on a feast day through another, and applied for the people, in the parochial church; but if this has not been done, as soon as he can, he ought to apply Mass for the people."¹⁴

1607. The STIPEND of a Mass is called the alms which the faithful bestow on priests, that the Sacrifice may be offered to God for them or to their intention.

By reason of stipend, Masses are distinguished into adventitious and founded. ADVENTITIOUS or manual Masses are called those which, by reason of an offered stipend, are to be celebrated in a determined number. FOUNDED Masses are called those which, in perpetuity or at least for a long time, daily or on certain days, are to be celebrated and applied, by reason of a foundation, that is, of a good left to some ecclesiastical Institute with the burden that Masses be celebrated. Therefore the fruit of the foundation has the nature of a stipend.

These things having been premised, we shall speak: 1. concerning the liceity of a stipend; 2. concerning the office of one accepting a stipend; 3. concerning reduction and condonation of Masses.

1608. Principle. It is licit for any priest, even a rich one, to accept a JUST STIPEND for celebrating Mass. - St. Thomas brings forward the reason, saying: "The priest does not accept money as the price of consecration, but as the stipend of his support."¹⁵ And because even the rich are worthy of reward when they place some work worthy of price, it follows also that rich priests licitly exact a stipend.¹⁶

Hence, more probably, a priest who intends to offer principally on account of the stipend is not infected with the stain of simony, although he is not easily excused from venial sin, because the temporal thing is then accepted not as the price of the thing, but for the stipend of support.¹⁷

1609. Questions. Q. 1. What stipend is to be had as JUST?

Resp. "The just stipend of a Mass is not indeed the sustenance of one day, as some have said; for the priest, besides the action of sacrificing, can occupy himself in the rest of the day in preaching, teaching, and similar exercises, so that he may gain entire support; but it is that which has been fixed by the Bishop, or by custom, or at least by a prudent man, if a tax made by custom or by the Bishop is lacking."¹⁸ And this opinion is common and to be held from the declaration of the S. C. of the Council.¹⁹ - "Wherefore Roncaglia rightly says that if a testator left Masses to be celebrated, without the alms having been fixed, they are to be celebrated according to the common tax, or are to be taxed according to the custom of the place, as the S. C. C. also declared,²⁰ with account taken of a rich or small inheritance."²¹

Q. 2. Whether REGULARS are held under grave obligation to stand by the Bishop's tax?

Resp. Affirmatively, according to the common opinion and from the decree of the S. C. of the Council,²² by which it was sanctioned thus: "The alms for any Mass whatever to be celebrated by Regulars in their churches is to be taxed by the judgment of the Ordinary, according to the custom of the region."²³

Q. 3. Whether it is licit for a priest to accept a stipend BELOW or ABOVE the tax?

Resp. 1. If only the law is considered, it is licit for a priest to obligate himself to celebrating Mass for a smaller alms, or below the tax; for anyone can yield his own right, and also celebrate without any stipend. But because remission of the customary alms can become damaging to other priests and in some way detract from the dignity of the Sacrifice itself, more probably it is licit for the Bishop to prohibit that an alms less than just be accepted, from the declaration of the S. C. of the Council.²⁴ "Wherefore, in the case in which the Bishop prohibits it, priests are altogether held to obey him." - Nevertheless, if someone knowingly has accepted smaller stipends, he ought to celebrate as many Masses as he promised, as the S. C. of the Council declared by order of Urban VIII in the year 1625;²⁵ nor can he licitly diminish their number, unless he acted ignorantly, as authors rightly concede.²⁶

Resp. 2. It is not licit for a priest to exact a stipend above the tax; for the Council of Trent commands Bishops that they altogether prohibit "importunate and ungenerous exactions of alms, rather than requests, and other things of this kind, which are not far from the simoniacal stain, or certainly from base gain."²⁷ Yet he can receive more, both from the spontaneous liberality of the giver, and the Bishop has no power to prohibit this, as was decided by the S. C. of the Council;²⁸ and from justice for extraordinary labor, for example for Mass to be celebrated at such an hour, or in such an inconvenient place. Whence requests are not illicit, indeed neither are agreements, provided they are just and moderate, and provided they are made without scandal.²⁹

Q. 4. Whether it is licit for one having faculty of celebrating twice in the day to accept a stipend for the second Mass?

Resp. Negatively, unless the Supreme Pontiff has indulged it.³⁰ It is clear from the Constitution Quod expensis of Benedict XIV, issued on August 26, 1748, and from various declarations of the S. C. of the Council.³¹ But neither is it licit to accept anything for the celebration alone, with the application remaining free. But for peculiar labor, for example by reason of a journey to a distant church, it is permitted, from the prudent judgment of the Bishop, to perceive something.³² - But under the aforesaid prohibition are not comprehended the three Masses which it is licit to celebrate on the solemnity of the Nativity of the Lord; for that repetition is conceded not from Indult, but from immemorial custom; whence it is licit to accept three stipends for three Masses.

But there are comprehended the two Masses which, from the concession of Benedict XIV, are permitted to be added in the kingdoms of Spain and Portugal on the day of the Commemoration of all the dead; unless somewhere another ancient privilege already existed.³³

1610. Principles. I. From acceptance of a stipend there arises an obligation OF STRICT JUSTICE to celebrate as many Masses as, by reason of the alms accepted, have been promised. - For, says Suarez, "there intervenes the true nature of justice, founded on mutual consent burdensome on both sides, which is explained by these words: I give that you may do; but this is a title of justice."³⁴

It is said to celebrate as many Masses, etc., since this 10th proposition was condemned by Alexander VII: "It is not against justice to accept a stipend for several Sacrifices, and to offer one Sacrifice." Moreover, the reason of the condemnation is both because the opinion which says that the Sacrifice is of finite value, both intensively and extensively, does not lack all probability; and because a stipend can be accepted only by the title of support; whence, one stipend having been accepted, the title for accepting another fails.

It is asked: Whether a priest OMITTING to celebrate a Mass owed either from stipend or from gratuitous promise sins gravely?

Resp. 1. He certainly sins gravely if the alms given is grave matter; and this is the unanimous opinion of authors. But according to the more probable opinion, he sins gravely also if the alms is only light matter. "The reason is that gravity of matter here is more probably to be measured not in order to the stipend, but to the fruit of the Mass, of which the one handing over the alms is deprived, to whom from privation of this kind grave damage certainly is brought."³⁵

Resp. 2. If he omits a Mass promised gratis, it is disputed. Others say that he sins gravely, on account of the reason just brought forward. "But others probably deny, because simple promise does not oblige under grave sin unless the one promising expressly obligates himself under grave sin.... But all agree that he sins gravely who omits a Mass owed from vow, or from the precept of a Prelate: because no one can doubt that this is grave matter in a vow or precept"³⁶ (cf. n. 628 and 1062).

1611. II. The obligation of celebrating from the acceptance of a stipend can, a peculiar stipulation being excluded, be fulfilled THROUGH ANOTHER; yet under this law, that the WHOLE STIPEND be handed over to him. The reason of the first is that, such stipulation being excluded, the obligation is only real, whence it suffices that the thing owed be furnished. - The reason of the second is that the priest "although he acquires ownership of the alms, nevertheless acquires it according to the will of those who give the alms; and he who furnishes the alms asks not only for a Mass, but also wishes that it be celebrated for such an alms; for a greater stipend makes him perceive richer fruit from the Sacrifice; and therefore this intention enters into the substance of the contract; therefore if the priest retains part of the stipend, he unjustly retains it against the will of the giver."¹ - And hence it is why the Church strictly prohibits that a priest who has undertaken a Mass to be celebrated with a certain stipend commit the same Mass to another to be celebrated, with part of the stipend retained for himself. Thus from the Decree of the S. C. C. approved by Urban VIII and confirmed by Innocent XII. And this 9th proposition 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 smaller stipend conferred on him, another part of the stipend retained for himself."²

Hence: 1. A procurator or executor of a testament is to be condemned for shameful gain, who causes Masses committed to himself to be celebrated where there is a smaller tax, so that thus he may retain the excess for himself.³ But an heir who, on account of an inheritance accepted, is held concerning Masses to be celebrated, can, if the place of celebration and the stipend have not been determined, commit them to any priests whatever to be celebrated.

2. He who, against the prohibition of the Church, retains part of a stipend for himself, not only sins, but is held to restitution. But this, according to the more common and more probable opinion, is to be made to the celebrant, "because, the burden having been transferred to him, the right also to the whole stipend is transferred according to the will of the lord."⁴

1612. From the aforesaid prohibition, namely that nothing be subtracted from the stipend, a threefold CAUSE can excuse: namely the will of the one bestowing the alms, the spontaneous yielding of the one undertaking the burden of celebrating, and concession of the Holy See.

1. The will of the one bestowing the alms excuses: for he can at will exceed the customary tax, either with the intention that the whole stipend fall to the celebrant, or with the intention that the excess fall to the one receiving. Nor, however, is it required that the one giving the stipend expressly manifest this intention of his. It suffices that from circumstances his will be morally clear. Hence, if for adventitious Masses a greater stipend is given, not so much in view of the Mass as of friendship, poverty, gratitude, kinship, etc., the priest can retain the excess for himself and commit the celebration of the Mass to another.⁵

As regards founded Masses, one must distinguish: if the intention of the founders was only that Masses be celebrated, the whole stipend is to be handed over to the celebrant. Thus from a recent decree of the S. C. C., in the Cologne case, July 18, 1868.⁶ But if by their mind they also intended to render better the incomes of the pastor or chaplain, the excess can be retained. And the same must be said, as is evident, if besides the celebration of Mass, other offices are to be fulfilled.

With respect to beneficiaries,⁷ it has been declared in the Bull Nuper of Innocent XII: "it is enough that the rector of a benefice, who can celebrate Mass through another, give to the priest celebrating a suitable alms, according to the custom of the city or province, unless something else has been provided in the foundation of the benefice."⁸ - The same must be said of a removable chaplain, "provided certain revenues for the chaplaincy have been established annually, and assigned perpetually to the chaplain; otherwise, however, if a certain alms is given to a chaplain of this kind for each Mass to be celebrated."⁹

2. The spontaneous and liberal yielding of the priest to whom the celebration is committed excuses; for just as he can remit the whole, so also a part. "Nevertheless, this is by no means to be admitted if you indicate the greater price accepted and ask the priest to remit it; or ask from him whether he consents that you retain a part; for then you cannot retain it, even if he agrees; for this in the Bull Quanta cura of Benedict XIV is asserted as an execrable abuse forbidden by several Pontiffs."¹⁰

3. Concession of the Holy See excuses. For the Roman Pontiff, by the supreme authority in which he has power in the Church, can concede that some part of the alms, the circumstances of things suggesting it, be retained. A concession of this kind in favor of poor churches was made through the Decree of the S. C. of the Council confirmed by Innocent XII. But in this Decree¹¹ it is read: "It is not to be permitted that churches and pious places, or their administrators, retain from the alms of Masses to be celebrated any portion, however minimal, by reason of the expenses which they undergo in the celebration of Masses, unless the churches and pious places have no other revenues which they can licitly expend for the use of the same expenses; and then what portion they will retain ought by no means to exceed the value of the expenses which necessarily must be undergone only for the very Sacrifice of the Mass; and nevertheless, even in that case, it must be cared for that from the monies which remain, expenses as above having been deducted, absolutely as many Masses be celebrated as had been prescribed by those offering the alms."¹² See also the Decree of the S. C. C., April 24, 1875.¹³

It is asked: Whether it is licit to EXCHANGE Masses, without unequal stipends being exchanged?

Resp. Such an exchange, principally if it is made by reason of retaining the greater stipend, seems to involve shameful gain, and therefore seems also to be disapproved: yet not under grave sin, especially if poverty excuses.¹⁴

1613. III. To make gain from stipends of Masses which are transmitted to others is most severely prohibited. For such a manner of acting very greatly dishonors the dignity of the Holy Sacrifice, and is a cause why this most august Sacrifice is held as of less account among the faithful. Concerning this matter these things are to be noted:

1. They are subject to excommunication latae sententiae reserved to the Roman Pontiff who "collect alms of greater price for Masses, and seek profit from them by causing them to be celebrated in places where Mass stipends are customarily of lesser price."¹⁵ These things have been more fully explained elsewhere (n. 1339).

2. The manner of acting of those booksellers or merchants savors of shameful trade, and therefore is to be disapproved and, if there is need, restrained even by ecclesiastical penalties by Bishops, who, public invitations and rewards being employed, or in any other way whatever, collect alms for Masses, and to priests to whom they commit them to be celebrated, pay not money, but books or other merchandise. Nor can this manner of acting be made honorable because the Masses are celebrated in the due number, or because in this way help is given to poor priests lacking alms of Masses, or because the gain which is drawn from the exchange of merchandise with alms is expended not for the proper advantage of those collecting, but for the use and increase of pious institutions and good works. - Wherefore it is not licit to cooperate in a manner of acting of this kind, whether by handing over alms for Masses to those collecting, or by accepting the burden of celebrating Masses.¹⁶

3. Priests do not act illicitly who for Masses celebrated receive books or other merchandise in place of a stipend, any species of negotiation or shameful profit being excluded.¹⁷

But whether the moderators or administrators of religious newspapers are to be disapproved, who commit Masses to be celebrated to priests, retaining from their alms the price corresponding in the case to those same newspapers? To this question the S. C. OF THE COUNCIL responded:¹⁸ "Negatively, provided nothing is subtracted from the will of the founders concerning the quantity of the stipend, the place and time of the celebration of Masses, every studied collection of Masses being excluded, and the one to whom it belongs by law being informed concerning the completed celebration of the Masses, the matter having been mentioned to the Most Holy."

1614. IV. All CIRCUMSTANCES of celebration which the one giving the alms stipulated are to be observed religiously. - The reason is that a true contract, I give that you may do, intervened, which induces obligation.

It remains that certain particular things, both concerning adventitious Masses and concerning founded Masses, be weighed in this place.

1615. I. TIME OF CELEBRATION. Adventitious Masses must, under grave obligation, be celebrated either at the established time, or within a moderate time, unless the one offering the stipend consents to delay.

It is said 1. at the established time, if indeed it has been expressly determined. Yet delay to the following day seems able to be excused, unless the one asking for the Mass fixed this day on account of a grave cause, or also offered a greater stipend to this end.¹⁹

It is said 2. or within a moderate time, if indeed none has been fixed beforehand. But the moderation of time must be taken altogether relatively.

And indeed: 1. any delay is to be judged grave by which the one asking for the Mass would be frustrated in the intended end. Wherefore a priest sins gravely "if he omits, within a time suitable for celebration, a Mass asked for the obtaining of some urgent grace, say for a happy childbirth, for escaping danger, for winning a lawsuit, etc. The reason is that the circumstance of time then pertains to the substance of the thing asked; whence, that time having passed, the priest is held to restore the stipend, and to warn the giver concerning the Masses omitted at the suitable time."²⁰ 2. "In Masses for the dead, many theologians deservedly regard a delay of one month as grave."²¹ 3. In other Masses, a delay of two months is to be judged grave; wherefore satisfaction must be made within two months, with this exception: unless the Holy See has conceded a delay; cf. n. 1620.

It is said 3. unless the one offering consents to delay. For to one knowing and willing, no injury is done. Thus also the S. C. C. defined.²² - Now, such consent is presumed by the fact itself if someone offers many Masses, for example 200, to a priest to be celebrated by the priest himself. Not likewise "when Masses are handed over to a community of several priests to be celebrated; because then he who gives the alms for many Masses is presumed to wish them to be celebrated sooner. Yet this is not to be understood as though all the priests of that community ought to occupy themselves in satisfying Masses of this kind, but that they ought not to defer as long as would be necessary if those Masses were committed to one person. Hence, I say then the whole number can be distributed among the individuals of the community, or at least among the greater part of it, if it is more numerous; and this distribution having been made, the whole community will be able to satisfy within only as much time as would be conceded to each member of the community for satisfying his own proportion. For Holzmann well says that those committing these numerous Masses can easily foresee that the community has other obligations."²³

1616. II. PLACE OF CELEBRATION AND KIND OF MASS. The celebrant who does not observe the condition of PLACE sins more or less gravely, according to the greater or lesser repugnance of him who gave the alms. - Indeed, if the place was intended equally principally, for example the Holy House of Loreto, he is held to restore the stipend.

One obligated to celebrate at a privileged altar satisfies by using a personal privilege;²⁴ and he who celebrated without satisfying the obligation undertaken is not now held to restitution of the stipend, but only to gaining a plenary indulgence applicable for the dead.²⁵ Thus the S. IND. C., February 22, 1847. But before the fact, it is not licit so to establish with oneself. The same Congregation, July 24, 1885.²⁶

Not to observe the KIND of Mass, for example if you celebrate the Mass of the occurring feast for a votive Mass or of Requiem, even when this is conceded by the Rubrics, does not exceed venial sin, since the substance of the Mass is equally had; wherefore the celebrant can also retain the stipend. - But if for a just cause the priest has acted thus, for example for observing the Rubrics, he has sinned in no way.²⁷

1617. Masses can be founded either for a time, or in perpetuity. Wherefore we note from the sacred Canons the following:

1. Perpetual burdens of Masses cannot be undertaken by secular priests without the written license of the Bishop or Vicar General. - But among Regulars, license of the Superior General or Provincial is required, as is clear from the decree Cum saepe of the S. C. of the Council, issued by the authority of Urban VIII and confirmed by Innocent XII through the Bull Nuper in the year 1697.

2. A beneficiary who has a benefice or chaplaincy with the burden of Masses ought, notwithstanding any custom whatever, to apply those Masses for the founders, or to their intention. - But indeed "when, in the foundation of a benefice or chapel, it has been expressly provided that the celebrant is not held to application of the Sacrifice, in that case the celebrant will be able to accept a new stipend, and by one Mass satisfy the obligation of the benefice or chapel, and likewise the one giving the new stipend." Decree of the S. C. C., July 13, 1630.¹ - "But when it had been asked from the S. C. on March 18, 1668, whether Masses ought to be applied for the testator when in the testament nothing had been declared concerning application, the S. C. C. responded that they are to be applied for the testator. - And the same was declared, on February 6, 1627, concerning chaplains who celebrate so that confreres or Nuns may be present at the Mass; since it is said that they cannot receive a stipend."² Moreover, "unless it is expressed in the institution of the chaplaincy that the chaplain celebrate by himself, he can always celebrate through another."³

3. Chaplains, Beneficiaries, etc., who from the law of foundation are held to apply Mass only on feast days, are still bound to apply on reduced feasts, as pastors are; for reduced feasts are always held in the Church as feasts of precept. Thus from the Letters Paternae charitati of Pius VII, April 10, 1818⁴ (cf. also n. 891, 1).

4. Canons, in cathedral and collegiate Churches, ought to celebrate daily the conventual Mass for their benefactors; although these, in their donations, had made absolutely no agreement for themselves, but had only declared that they offered their goods to God for the remission of their sins; and although contrary custom, even immemorial, flourished somewhere. - Indeed, where the custom flourishes of applying a second or even third Mass for them, the Bishop ought to command that this custom be kept holily; but where it does not flourish, at least in the Memento of the second and third conventual Mass, let a commemoration of them be made. Thus Benedict XIV, Const. Cum semper.⁵

5. A priest who, on account of a benefice or chaplaincy, is held to celebrate daily can, from the common opinion, sometimes omit the celebration of Mass if a legitimate cause intervenes, for example devotion, reverence toward the Sacrifice, or infirmity not exceeding 15 days, indeed, Lugo says probably, even if the infirmity were prolonged for two months. He can also probably, provided he does not accept a stipend, celebrate four or six times in the year for himself or for a very dear friend; for this is reasonably presumed from the mind of the founder. Otherwise, however, if he had expressed the contrary; for example by saying: "I will that Mass be celebrated daily, by the chaplain or by another"; or also: "I will that, in such a church, Mass be celebrated daily," etc.⁶

6. It is not licit to celebrate founded Masses in another church, on another altar, or at another hour than those which were established by the founder. Nor is this obligation light if the founder stipulated circumstances of this kind on account of a grave cause, for example on account of the memory or convenience of his own family, or of the people. But if no special end gave occasion to the stipulation, or if the cause why it was made no longer exists, for example if the family is extinct, or if it dwells elsewhere: the aforesaid obligation will not be grave; indeed, it will be null if the priest compensates it by celebrating on a privileged altar.⁷ Otherwise, the obligation is so grave that the priest would sin mortally if he often, or without cause, or without dispensation, omitted or changed those circumstances. "I said often; for he will sin only venially if he does it rarely, say once or twice in the month; and he is more easily excused if he changes only the altar, and not the church. Likewise, I said without cause; for he will by no means sin if he celebrates elsewhere from a just cause, say if the altar is execrated, or because, having come out of the sacristy, he saw that it was occupied by another. - Likewise, I said without dispensation; for the BISHOP can well dispense that celebration be made in another place, from a reasonable cause, say on account of the utility of one's own church, etc."⁸ For this faculty belongs to Bishops, as Delegates of the Holy See, as is commonly drawn from Trent.⁹ But where the transfer is opposed to the express will of the testator, or to divine worship, or to the convenience of the people, it is not customarily conceded by the S. Congregation of the Council, and in that case Bishops cannot dispense.¹⁰

1618. It is asked: Whether PRESCRIPTION can be made against burdens of Masses?

Resp. Some affirm; "but, according to the truer opinion, such prescription is not admitted, since in Trent¹¹ it is forbidden that derogation can be made from all burdens imposed, both in foundation and in any other pious disposition or conferral of benefices; and Pius IV in the Bull by which he confirmed the Council declared void whatever might be done in the future against it.... But an irritating clause binds even the ignorant, and in beneficial causes infects title and possession. At least we say, in practice the first opinion can be probable with difficulty, since good faith can with difficulty be presumed in beneficiaries, since it is rather presumed that they know the laws of the benefice."¹²

Note. - 1. Authors notice that it is most opportune that any priest note in a book the Masses accepted and the Masses celebrated by himself, so that thus, even in the case of unexpected death, all things become known to the heirs. 2. But this is altogether prescribed by Innocent XII to all rectors and ministers of churches, whether secular or regular, that each year they be able to render an account to their Superiors concerning Masses celebrated, whether they are perpetual, temporary, or even manual. - And moreover, the table of perpetual and temporary burdens must be exposed in a more visible and obvious place, to guard against burdens of Masses being undertaken beyond their strength, from the Bull Nuper.

1619. REDUCTION of Masses is properly called that by which burdens of Masses are constrained to a lesser number for future time, whether this is done in perpetuity or for an established time. - When reduction is referred to past time and imports the omitted celebration of Masses, then it is properly called remission, absolution, and CONDONATION.¹³

1620. Principles. I. Reduction of Masses, today, can be made only by the APOSTOLIC SEE, but not by the Bishop, nor by a regular prelate. - This is evident from the Constitution Nuper of Innocent XII, § 1, where it is said thus: "It is strictly prohibited that Bishops... in any way reduce any burdens of Masses to be celebrated, either imposed after the same Council or at the threshold of foundation; but for all these to be reduced, moderated, or commuted, recourse is to be had to the Apostolic See."¹⁴ The same applies both concerning condonation and concerning concession of a longer time for fulfilling burdens of Masses.¹⁵ Only in a twofold case does the right of reducing Masses belong to Bishops: 1. if the testator himself has granted this faculty to the Bishop; 2. if the Holy See has conceded such privilege to Bishops, as frequently obtains.

1621. II. Reduction or condonation of Masses can be made only when a JUST CAUSE intervenes. This is evident of itself. - "But the CAUSES from which the Apostolic See is accustomed to reduce Masses are scarcity of priests, smallness of stipend, or increase of the current stipend, diminution of the revenues of a monastery, or greater expenses necessary for living, etc.; finally if necessity of the brethren, or of the fabric of the church or monastery, urges."¹⁶

Note. For obtaining reduction or condonation, recourse is made to the Holy See, through the S. C. of the Council, or through the Fabric of St. Peter. - But when the Holy See grants CONDONATION on account of just causes, it always imposes some salutary penance, and especially the penance of celebrating a certain number of Masses. - Moreover, it supplies from its spiritual treasury whatever has been sinned in fulfilling the burdens; and for the suffrage of souls for whom the omitted Sacrifices ought to have been offered, it commands that a suitable number of Masses be celebrated daily by the chaplains assigned to this office in the Vatican Basilica. But if someone, with the intention of obtaining a condonation of this kind, has presumed to omit the celebration of Masses, in this case, the grace in no way suffices, and hope of this kind, as irrational and illicit, is condemned and reprobated.¹⁷

If it concerns only the internal forum, that is, if someone omitted either founded or adventitious Masses without the omission being publicly established, and has become unable to satisfy: for condonation, recourse can be made to the S. Penitentiary, namely through the confessor, who ought to conceal the name of the penitent.

1622. III. To Bishops belongs the faculty of INTERPRETING, in doubt, the will of founders, and of reducing burdens of Masses undertaken by contract to equity. For in these things Bishops use their judicial power, which is proper to ordinary jurisdiction; wherefore, if they pronounce concerning an obligation constituted or not constituted, concerning a burden resolved or not resolved, etc., they do not exceed the limits prescribed to them by common law. Nor then is there place for reduction at the Holy See (cf. n. 1083 and 1087, q. 2).

It is asked: Whether sometimes a chaplain, or beneficiary, can by himself diminish the number of Masses?

Resp. "If the revenues fail in whole, without his fault, it is certain he is not held to celebrate Masses," as is commonly taught and as the S. C. C. defined.¹⁸ "But if the revenues fail in part, it also seems certain that the chaplain can diminish Masses, in the case in which the testator designated a suitable alms, for example three small coins for each Mass; because then, just as the number of Masses would have to be increased if the revenues were increased, so it is to be diminished if the revenues are diminished."¹⁹

NB. It is greatly to be desired that those who impose perpetual burdens of Masses, in the very act of foundation, grant to the beneficiary or Bishop the faculty of reducing their number, in the case in which the revenues are diminished.

This obligation can be considered under a threefold respect: 1° by reason of the priesthood; 2° by reason of office; 3° by reason of stipend.

1320. - I say: All priests, by reason of the Priesthood, are bound by divine law, under grave obligation, to celebrate at some time. This is proved from the words of Christ:¹ Do this in commemoration of me. By these words, according to the testimony of the Council of Trent, Christ commanded the Apostles and their successors to offer Sacrifice. Moreover, all priests in their ordination receive not only the power, but also the charge and office annexed to it, of sacrificing. Hence the Apostle:² For every Pontiff taken from among men is appointed for men in those things which are toward God, that he may offer gifts and Sacrifices. But in a grave matter anyone is gravely bound to execute an office undertaken. Therefore ... Thus St. Thomas.³ See St. Alphonsus.⁴

1321. Questions. - Query 1° How often in life or in the year is a priest bound to celebrate?

Resp. It is not clearly established. It seems more probable that he is not bound to celebrate except three or four times in the year, or on the more solemn feasts. Indeed it appears not improbable that a priest has satisfied his office if, on whatever days at last, he offers Sacrifice three or four times in the year.

Query 2° Is he excused from every sin who celebrates only four times in the year?

Resp. No. For he does not seem to be excused from some venial sin. Thus commonly according to the mind of Trent,² where it is said: "Let the Bishop take care that they" (Presbyters) "celebrate Masses at least on Lord's days and solemn feasts." Indeed Holy Mother Church desires that a priest offer Sacrifice on individual days, and pious priests are accustomed very rarely to omit it.

1322. - I say I. All Pastors of souls, by natural and divine law, are bound at some time to celebrate for their sheep. The reason is because they ought to feed them. This is also established from Trent,³ where it says thus: "Since by divine precept it has been commanded to all to whom the care of souls has been committed, to know their sheep, to offer Sacrifice for them," etc.

I say II. The same, by ecclesiastical law, are bound to celebrate for their sheep on all Sundays and on the days brought forward by Our Most Holy Lord Pius IX in the Encyclical Amantissimi Redemptoris, 3 May 1858 (see p. 87), from several Decrees of the Church, but especially from the Constitution of Benedict XIV, Cum semper.⁴ To this, however, not only secular Pastors are bound, but also Regulars; likewise those who for a time or removably, e.g. on account of the absence or infirmity of the Pastor, are deputed to supply his office, as Vice-pastors.⁵ Indeed a Pastor set over two parishes (but not a Bishop set over two dioceses¹) is bound, outside the case of an indult, to apply 2 Masses, unless the union of the two parishes is plenary and extinctive, so that from two parochial Churches there has entirely come to be one, by the extinction of the title of the other.² That burden belongs a fortiori to Ordinaries after possession of the See has been obtained,³ but not to Vicars Capitular.⁴ Missionaries, however, and Vicars Apostolic (provided there is not question of places in which Episcopal Sees and Parishes have already been canonically erected, and Vicars Apostolic and Missionaries have been sent to them to perform the duties of legitimate Pastors), and titular Bishops, are by no means bound to apply Masses, although from charity it is becoming that they do so. V. T. I. (§), p. 471.

Query. Is a Pastor or Bishop who is ill, or prevented from celebration for another cause, bound on feast days to celebrate for the people through another?

Resp. It must be answered affirmatively, because that burden is not merely personal, but at the same time real, not otherwise than the burden of preaching, which consequently can and must be fulfilled through another.⁶

1323. Principles. - I. A stipend or alms can lawfully be accepted for a Mass which one is not bound to read for another. For a stipend is not given as a price or compensation of the Mass, but as a means for the support of the Minister. This is also established from 1 Cor. 9. 13: Do you not know that they who work in the sanctuary eat the things that are of the sanctuary; and they who serve the altar participate with the altar?

II. Priests are bound from justice to celebrate Mass and to apply it determinately according to the intention of those who have given the stipend for this. For there intervenes with them an onerous agreement, which, by the title of justice, must be observed not otherwise than in any other contract. Hence a priest who, whether through himself or through another Minister, omits to apply according to the intention of him who gave the stipend, is bound to restitution by strict right.

III. A priest cannot satisfy a double stipend by one single Mass, but for each one he must offer a distinct Sacrifice. The reason is, 1° because it is not certainly established that a Sacrifice offered for several persons profits each one as much as it profits when applied for one alone, although this is more probable to many; 2° because this very thing is established from the 8th proposition condemned by Alexander VII, p. XIII.

1324. Questions. - Query 1° What is judged the just stipend of a priest celebrating?

Resp. The quantity of a just stipend cannot be universally determined. It is lawful to require the stipend established by the Bishop or by custom.¹ To this rule even Regulars are bound to conform themselves under grave obligation, from the Decree of the Sacred Congregation cited by Benedict XIV.² - St. Alphonsus.³ And indeed the Bishop, at least as regards manual alms, can prohibit a stipend less than the established tax from being accepted (Benedict XIV⁴); that this not be done regularly is prohibited by the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore.⁵ - Nevertheless, just as through charity or friendship a lesser stipend can be admitted, so also from the liberality of the giver it is right to receive a greater one. Likewise, a priest can receive more for extraordinary labor, e.g. for a Sacrifice to be celebrated at such an hour or in such an inconvenient place, etc. - Nor is a priest to whom richer stipends are available obliged to accept those which correspond to the tax; for he would be obliged with his own loss.

Query 2° Does a priest sin gravely who, after receiving a stipend, delays celebrating Mass?

Resp. Affirmatively. The reason is because he violates a contract in a grave matter. This is also established from the Decrees of the S. C. C. in the year 1625. - St. Alphonsus.⁶

Query 3° What delay is judged grave?

Resp. It is controverted; certainly a delay which exceeds three months can seem grave. - Thus commonly with St. Alphonsus,⁷ against others who require an entire year. - But more probably a priest does not sin gravely who celebrates a promised Mass within two months. In Masses, however, which are to be celebrated for the dead, a delay of one month is reputed grave according to St. Alphonsus,¹ Salmanticenses, Lugo, etc. - Besides, the statutes of Bishops also must be attended to. Certainly, however, a priest sins gravely whenever "he omits to celebrate, within a time fitting to the circumstances, a Mass requested and promised for obtaining some urgent grace"; and therefore he who has accepted a stipend for a happy childbirth is bound to restore the accepted stipend if, even licitly, he has celebrated after the childbirth. - The will of the one giving the stipend must also be attended to; for when it is principally given for assisting the priest, and the burden of celebrating is not imposed so strictly, even a very long delay will be without fault.

"But that a more distinct account may be had of the obligation of accurately fulfilling the burdens of Masses, both manual and for an indefinite time, we decree that in each secular and regular church there be a catalogue or table of burdens, which have been imposed on them in perpetuity or for a certain and predefined time, and respectively accepted; and that in the same place in the sacristy books be kept, in one of which perpetual burdens of this sort or temporary burdens are to be inscribed, but in the other manual and adventitious Masses, together with a faithful and distinct notation of the subsequent fulfillment of both."²

Query 4° Does a priest sin gravely by omitting to celebrate a Mass, if the stipend accepted for it is not grave matter, e.g. $0.50?

Resp. Affirmatively, more probably, unless perhaps the stipend is so slender that the Mass appears to have been promised gratis. The reason is because he who gave the stipend suffers a notable spiritual detriment.³

Query 5° Whether, or in what way, does one sin who omits a Mass promised gratis?

Resp. 1° He does not sin whenever there is not truly a contract of promise, but the one promising only shows a benevolent purpose.

Resp. 2° More probably he sins only venially when a true promise has intervened; because a simple promise does not oblige under grave obligation, unless, as Lugo says, the one promising expressly obliges himself under grave obligation and from justice.

Query 6° Is a priest guilty of simony who celebrates chiefly with a view to the stipend?

Resp. See n. 353, Query 3°. Resp. ad 1.

1325. Query 7° Can a priest commit a Mass to another to be celebrated, giving a smaller stipend than he himself has received?

Resp. No, not indeed generally of itself, but because, on account of the appearance of base gain, the S. C. C. prohibited this by a Decree approved by Urban VIII and confirmed by Innocent XII, where these things are had: "Wishing to remove every damnable gain from the Church, it prohibits a priest who has undertaken to celebrate a Mass with a certain alms from committing the same Mass to another to be celebrated while retaining for himself part of the same Mass." Cf. proposition 9 condemned by Alexander VII, p. XIII, and the Rescript of the S. C. C. 19 Jan. 1869.

Except: 1° If from the circumstances it is morally established that the excess of the stipend was handed over by a title extrinsic to the celebration, for instance friendship, gratitude, etc. 2° If another priest, entirely spontaneously and not having been asked, remits either part of the ordinary stipend or the excess. 3° If there is not question of manual Masses, concerning which alone the Decrees speak, but either 1) of perpetual Masses entrusted to some priest, or 2) of Masses to be celebrated by force of a rich legacy left to some priest for life, or 3) of those which are to be celebrated from a benefice or foundation, provided that the contrary has not been provided for in the foundation, a stipend is given according to the tax or custom of the place, and, if there is question of founded Masses, the one celebrating has been determined at least in some way, e.g. the Pastor for the time being. Thus St. Alphonsus,² to whom especially the S. C. C., in the Response of 29 Aug. 1860, refers for the solution of this question. See p. LXXXI. 7. The Response of the S. C. C. 18 July 1868 to the Archbishop of Cologne agrees as regards founded Masses. 4° If the remission is made, even when the one remitting has been asked, but with him consenting with complete liberty, especially in favor of a pious work, provided however: a) there is not question of a matter which by its amplitude and its annexed laws takes on the appearance of public business, which is illicit to clerics; and b) in the case of an extraordinary stipend, those who gave that stipend did not give it on that condition, that they should perceive more abundant fruit from the Mass, which indeed is to be presumed, unless the contrary is sufficiently established, as in the exception under 1°. - Besides, all the exceptions are to be understood with this addition: provided nothing is taken away from the will of the founders or givers concerning the place and time of the celebration of the Masses, any studied collection of them being excluded, and the one to whom it belongs by law being taught concerning the subsequent celebration of them.¹

It is pleasing here to append the following questions proposed to the Sacred Congregation of the Council by the Archbishop of Cologne.

I. "Many Masses to be sung have been founded in parochial churches, ... to which a richer dowry has been assigned by the founders, to be administered by the church-provisors, from which Pastors, to whom by diocesan law and custom the celebration of these Masses belongs, receive an alms greater than the diocesan one, although no priest has expressly been called by the founders to celebrate these Masses."

II. "In celebrating Marriages and obsequies of the dead, stole-fees are not paid to the Pastor in a lump, but a certain portion is assigned for individual acts required for duly performing these functions. Hence a certain alms also, and one richer than for the other manual Masses, has been fixed by the Ordinary both for nuptial Masses and for funeral Masses; the celebration of which by law and custom belongs to the Pastors."

III. "Very many alms are offered through the year to Pastors by the faithful for Masses to be sung, either according to the tax constituted by the Ordinary, or even richer alms are spontaneously handed over."

"But since Pastors are sometimes hindered by illness, absence, and other sacred functions from celebrating these Masses themselves in the three cases set forth, other priests supply their places, whether attached to the same churches for their assistance, whose salary is paid by the church-provisors, or even outsiders. Hence the question arises whether Pastors in the same three cases must hand over the whole alms to the priests supplying their places; or whether rather it is lawful for them, retaining part for themselves, to give a smaller alms to the celebrant? But if in these cases part of the alms can licitly be retained by the Pastors, it is further asked whether the diocesan alms for low Masses must be paid by them to the priest celebrating, or rather that constituted by the Ordinary for sung Masses?"

To these questions the S. C., on 28 March 1874, rescribed: Let it be deferred; and the matter having again been maturely weighed and discussed in the meetings of the day 25 July 1874, judged that response should be made:

To I. That the whole alms must be paid by the Pastor for Masses whether low or sung.

To II. Since there is question of stole-fees, it is enough if the Pastor recompenses the celebrant with the ordinary alms. (11) p. 418.

To III. That the whole alms must be paid, unless it is established with moral certainty that the excess of the common alms was offered with regard to the person of the Pastor himself.¹

But these resolutions, since there is question of a matter of strict right, are valid also for our quasi-pastors. More easily, however, among us cases occur in which richer stipends are offered on account of a title distinct from the celebration of Masses, for instance for the support of a Missionary to whom certain or sufficient revenues are lacking.²

Query 8° Is he who retains part of the stipend bound to restitution?

Resp. Affirmatively. The reason is, 1° because this is deduced from the proposition condemned by Alexander VII related under this n. q. 7°. For the proposition said that a priest retaining part of the stipend can satisfy through another; therefore it follows that the contradictory is true, namely that he cannot satisfy; but satisfaction regards not only the honesty of the act, but also its justice; and he who does not satisfy an obligation of justice is bound to restitution; 2° because a priest dividing a stipend, if it is richer, acts against the will of the giver: for the will of the giver is not only that Mass be celebrated, but that it be celebrated for such a stipend. For he does not wish to bestow something gratuitously on him who does not celebrate. - Thus St. Alphonsus,³ saying that this opinion must be held. But to whom must restitution be made, namely to the one giving the alms, or to the celebrant? More commonly and more probably they teach that it must be made to the celebrant.¹

Query 9° Can a priest to whom a rich stipend is offered for today's Mass, having retained this, ask another priest to celebrate for him, promising to celebrate on the following day for the same person, who is going to be celebrated for an ordinary alms?

Resp. It is controverted. The first opinion denies it, since this cannot be excused from the appearance of base gain. - Thus St. Alphonsus, who says that Concina thinks thus rightly, adding however that he deservedly does not dare to condemn this as grave, and leaves it to the judgment of prudent men whether the poverty of the priest can excuse from every fault.²

The second opinion affirms, with Lacroix,³ and others.

Query 10° How are Masses to be taxed, for the reading of which a testator has left some sum of money?

Resp. They are to be taxed according to the custom of the place or the law of the diocese prevailing for private Masses. But if the testator himself has taxed them, but below the custom of the place or the norm of the received tax, they are to be taxed by the Ordinary according to the custom of the place, account being taken of whether the inheritance is rich or slender. - Thus the S. C. determines in St. Alphonsus.⁴

Query 11° Can rich priests accept a stipend?

Resp. Affirmatively. The reason is because every worker, whether rich or poor, is worthy of his wage, as Christ himself says in Luke⁵ and according to the Apostle.⁶ Besides, if they could not accept a stipend, and otherwise are not bound to celebrate without a stipend, since there is no law which obliges them to celebrate thus, the faithful would often be unable to obtain Masses. This is established besides from the practice of the universal Church. - St. Alphonsus,⁷ and others commonly.

Query 12° What is to be said of booksellers and merchants who in various ways exchange Masses to be celebrated for books or merchandise?

Resp. The S. C. C., 9 Sept. 1874, to the following doubts:

1. Whether the manner of acting of those booksellers or merchants savors of base traffic, and therefore is to be disapproved and, if necessary, restrained also by ecclesiastical penalties by their Bishops, who, by employing public invitations and premiums or in any other way whatever, collect alms for Masses, and to priests, to whom they commit them to be celebrated, repay not money but books or other merchandise?

2. Whether this manner of acting can be made honorable either because, with no diminution having been made, as many Masses are committed to be celebrated by the aforesaid collectors as correspond to the alms collected, or because through it poor priests, lacking alms for Masses, are assisted?

3. Whether collections and distributions of alms of this kind, even then, are to be disapproved and restrained, as above, by Bishops, when the profit which is drawn from the exchange of merchandise with alms is expended not for the private advantage of the collectors, but for the use or increase of pious institutions and good works?

4. Whether they concur in base traffic, and therefore are to be disapproved and even restrained, as above, who hand over alms for Masses accepted from the faithful or from pious places to booksellers, merchants, and other collectors of them, whether they receive or do not receive anything from the same under the name of a premium?

5. Whether they concur in base traffic, and therefore are to be disapproved and restrained, as above, who receive from the said booksellers and merchants, for Masses to be celebrated, books or other merchandise at the price of these, whether diminished or whole?

6. Whether they act illicitly who for Masses celebrated receive, in place of a stipend, books or other merchandise, with any commerce or appearance of base gain being excluded?

Responded: - To 1. Affirmatively.

To 2. Negatively.

To 3. Affirmatively.

To 4. Affirmatively.

To 5. Affirmatively.

To 6. Negatively.

Query 13° Can administrators of Churches retain something for themselves from the alms of Masses for the expenses of altars, lights, etc.?

Resp. No, unless the Churches have no other revenues; and then in no way must the value of the expenses which are necessary for the Sacrifice of the Mass itself be exceeded, and nevertheless also in that case care must be taken that from the monies which remain, the expenses as above having been deducted, absolutely as many Masses are celebrated as were prescribed by those offering the alms.¹ See the exception in Ben. XIV, Inst. 56. n. 13.

Query 14° Must he restore who, after receiving a stipend for a Mass to be celebrated on a privileged altar, celebrates the same on another altar?

Resp. It seems it must be denied; but he will be bound to gain a plenary indulgence applicable to the dead, such as are the indulgences of the Way of the Cross, etc. For thus a proportionate compensation is bestowed. If, however, he has accepted a stipend greater than ordinary for this, he is bound to restore the excess. - Thus St. Alphonsus,² Elbel,³ Sporer.⁴

But if someone accepts a stipend in order that he celebrate in a certain place, e.g. at a miraculous Statue, or in a Chapel so that the people may hear Mass, or at a certain time, e.g. on the Sabbath day in honor of the Blessed Virgin, so that the place and time are intended of themselves, he cannot retain the stipend unless he has read the Mass at the prescribed time and place. The reason is because otherwise the one giving the stipend is judged to be gravely unwilling. But it is otherwise if the time and place are not intended of themselves.

Query 15° Is one obliged by stipend to celebrate on a privileged altar for a deceased person bound to read a Mass of Requiem, when the RITE permits it?

Resp. Affirmatively. The reason is because this is required for gaining indulgences, as is clear from the declaration of the S. C. R. 11 April 1840.⁵

Query 16° Does one obliged by stipend to READ a Mass of Requiem, or a votive Mass, satisfy if he says another Mass?

Resp. Affirmatively as regards a Mass of Requiem, unless the testator or the one giving the stipend has expressly asked that it be said (S. R. C. 5 Aug. 1662 and 12 Sept. 1840). - Negatively as regards a votive Mass (S. R. C. 12 Sept. 1840), unless either 1° the one requesting consents; or 2° a votive Mass has been accepted which is not permitted to be celebrated, as in honor of a Mystery or of a Blessed; or 3° a votive Mass has been accepted for a day on which it is prohibited, and cannot conveniently be deferred to a free day.

But truly, neither in the case of a Mass of Requiem expressly requested, nor in the case of a votive Mass, do they sin gravely who read the Mass of the day, and not even lightly in the excepted cases, or when a legitimate cause is present, such as however one's own devotion is not.¹ The reason is because the essential value is the same; but the privation of accidental value does not bring so grave a prejudice. Besides, the virtue of fidelity in the case does not oblige so gravely.

Note, however, that here there is not question of the cases treated under q. 14° and q. 15°, nor of Masses of Requiem to be celebrated in chant, concerning which, as also concerning this whole question, see de Herdt.²

Query 17° Can a stipend be received for a Mass to be celebrated on the day of the Commemoration of all the faithful departed?

Resp. Affirmatively. The reason is because not all priests are bound on this day to apply Mass for all the dead, indeed they are not obliged to celebrate. Therefore they can apply Mass at will either for all the dead dwelling in Purgatory, or for some only. This is established from a Decree of the S. C.³ But this being posited, absolutely nothing stands in the way of a stipend being able to be accepted for Mass. - Thus commonly.⁴

Query 18° What does the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore counsel, and what does it prescribe, concerning Masses to be founded or founded Masses?

Resp. To the first. In the Appendix of the Council⁵ there is reported, and therefore by way of norm seems to be counseled, Decree LV of the Second Provincial Council of Cincinnati, which reads thus: "That a certain norm be established in this Province for foundations of Masses, ... the Fathers judged that foundations of this kind, especially when they are perpetual, because of the peculiar circumstances in which we are placed, ... are to be admitted with great caution; also on this condition, that for a private Mass there first exist a fund of at least fifty scutata, but for a sung Mass, of one hundred scutata." ... But the best precaution will be if the agreement to be entered into with the founder contains at least these conditions: 1) that there will be no future obligation of celebrating, if the capital destined for this end for any cause whatever has either perished, or remained idle or unfruitful; 2) that the number of Masses to be celebrated be diminished proportionately, if for any cause whatever the revenues do not reach the stipend established by the founder; and therefore that not only the capital, but also the stipend of the Masses be determined, or at least that the faculty of reduction be reserved to the Ordinary; 3) that, if for any cause whatever the Church in which the Masses are to be celebrated should lack a priest, or even be destroyed, they can be celebrated in another to be designated by the Ordinary.

Resp. to the second. "Let foundations not be accepted without the previous assent of the Bishop, if there is question of a secular institute, or of the regular Prelate, if the foundation is made in favor of an exempt community."¹

Query 19° What is the reduction of Masses?

Resp. It is the diminution of the number of Masses to be celebrated, granted by legitimate authority for a legitimate cause.

It is said: 1° of Masses to be celebrated; for reduction regards the future, or Masses to be omitted; and, if there is question of Masses omitted, there is a condonation, which is reserved privatively to the Supreme Pontiff. If it is granted, a small alms is imposed, which is called composition. B. 14. d. S. L. 13. c. ult. n. 15.

It is said: 2° by legitimate authority, namely through the Supreme Pontiff, as the S. C. C. declared, with Urban VIII and Innoc. XII approving, in the Bull Nuper. - Nevertheless the Bishop also will be able to reduce if either a) as is plain of itself, he has obtained an Indult for this, in the use of which Indult, lest Bishops wander from the path, rules are suitably handed down by Benedict XIV in the book On the Diocesan Synod, C. ult. n. 22-29; likewise nn. 32. 34. 35; or b) the founder has given the Bishop this faculty;² or c) the imposed and accepted burden was made inter vivos by force of a convention entered into with the Bishop; for that convention includes this tacit condition: the thing, or capital, remaining in that state in which the fruits yield at least the ordinary stipend of a manual Mass. Therefore in the case of diminution of revenues or loss of the fund, the Bishop by his ordinary power, or by assuming the parts of a judge, can either rescind the contract, or at least reduce it to the terms of right.³

It is said: 3° for a legitimate cause, e.g. diminution of revenues, increase by the Bishop of the alms, etc.

I say. All Pastors of souls are held by natural and divine right at some time to celebrate Mass so that they may apply it for their sheep. The reason is taken both from the fact that to feed someone spiritually necessarily implies procuring for him spiritual goods, which are obtained chiefly through the most excellent Sacrifice of the Mass, and from the Council of Trent, sess. 23, chap. 1, de Reform., where it is said: "Since by divine precept it has been commanded to all to whom the care of souls has been committed, to know their sheep, to offer sacrifice for them," etc.¹

¹ Cf. Addenda, p. 1088, n. 12.

Question 1. What does that particle "at some time" import?

Resp. The Church of God, interpreter of natural and divine right, has now determined its extension. Therefore Pastors of souls are held to celebrating for their sheep "on Sundays and other feast days which are still observed by precept and which have been removed from the number of feast days of precept." These are the very words of Pope Leo XIII in his Apostolic Letters In Suprema. But if you ask how many and which are those feast days, besides Sundays, whether actually observed or suppressed, it is answered that they are 35, and their catalogue is found above under n. 327. - Cf. Acta S. Sedis, vol. 14, pp. 529 and following.

Question 2. Who are the Pastors of souls who, whether by natural and divine right or ecclesiastical right, are held to celebrating for the people?

Resp. Bishops: §1. They also must, after having taken possession of the see, every excuse of scantiness of revenues or any other exception being removed, apply Mass for the people committed to them on all Sundays and other feast days of precept, even suppressed ones.

§2. On the feast of the Nativity of the Lord, and if any feast of precept falls on a Sunday, it is enough that they apply one Mass for the people.

§3. If a feast is so transferred that on the day to which it is transferred not only is the office with the Mass of the transferred feast done, but the obligations also of hearing Mass and abstaining from servile works are observed, Mass for the people is to be applied on the day to which; otherwise on the day from which.

§4. The Bishop himself must apply Mass for the people on the days indicated above by himself; if he is legitimately impeded from its celebration, on the stated days let him apply it through another; if he cannot furnish even this, let him apply it as soon as possible either by himself or through another on another day.

§5. Although a Bishop governs two or more dioceses united equally principally, or, besides his own diocese, has another or others in administration, nevertheless he satisfies the obligation through the celebration and application of one Mass for the whole people committed to him.

§6. A Bishop who has not satisfied the obligation concerning which in the preceding paragraphs should as quickly as possible apply for the people as many Masses as he omitted (Can. 339).

Apostolic Vicars and Prefects:

They must apply the Sacrifice of the Mass for the peoples committed to them at least on the solemnities of the Nativity of the Lord, Epiphany, Easter, Ascension, Pentecost, the Most Holy Body of Christ, the Immaculate Conception and Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Saint Joseph her spouse, the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul, and All Saints, with the prescription of can. 339, §§2 and following being observed (Can. 306).

Abbots nullius have the same obligations which belong to residential Bishops in their own diocese. - Cf. Can. 323, §1.

The Capitular Vicar is held by the obligation of applying Mass for the people according to the norm of Can. 339. - Cf. Can. 440.

§1. The pastor is held by the obligation of applying Mass for the people according to the norm of can. 339, the quasi-pastor according to the norm of can. 306 (Can. 466).¹

It is fitting from charity that titular Bishops sometimes apply the Sacrifice of the Mass for their diocese, but short of obligation. - Cf. Can. 348.

With relation to the suppressed feasts concerning which in Can. 339, §1, 466, §1, on which namely Mass must be applied by Bishops and Pastors for the people committed to them, nothing in this matter has been changed by the Code of Canon Law from the discipline in force up to this time. Thus the Pontifical Commission for authentically interpreting the canons of the Code. - 17 Feb. 1918.

§2. A Pastor who perhaps governs several parishes equally principally united, or, besides his own parish, has another or others in administration, must apply only one Mass for the peoples committed to him on the prescribed days.²

§3. The local Ordinary, from a just cause, can permit that the pastor apply Mass for the people on another day than that on which he is bound by law.

§4. Let the pastor celebrate the Mass to be applied for the people in the parochial church, unless circumstances of things demand or advise that Mass be celebrated elsewhere (Can. 466).

If someone on the same day is urged by the burden of each Mass, both for the people and conventual, let him himself celebrate and apply this latter by himself, and the former through another or by himself on the following day. - Can. 419, §2.

¹ Cf. Addenda, p. 1106, n. 48.

² Cf. Addenda, p. 1150, n. 124.

Question 3. Are priests who among us have care of souls, by whatever name they are called, held by the aforesaid burden?

Resp. They are held, because they are pastors or quasi-pastors. - Cf. Second Plenary Council of Baltimore, n. 367. - Can. 216, 451. This latter canon has itself thus: A Pastor is a priest or moral person to whom a parish has been conferred as title, with care of souls to be exercised under the authority of the local Ordinary. Quasi-pastors are those who govern quasi-parishes. But Canon 216 is read thus:

§1. The territory of any diocese is to be divided into distinct territorial parts; and to each part its own particular church with a determined people is to be assigned, and its own particular rector, as the proper pastor of the same, is to be placed over it for the necessary care of souls.

§2. In like manner an apostolic vicariate and apostolic prefecture, where this can conveniently be done, are to be divided.

§3. The parts of a diocese concerning which in §1 are parishes; the parts of an apostolic vicariate and apostolic prefecture, if a particular rector has been assigned to them, are called quasi-parishes (Can. 216).¹

¹ Cf. Addenda, pp. 1103, 1104, nn. 44, 45.

I. The most wise Pontiff Benedict XIV set this argument in full light both in his treatise On the Sacrifice of the Mass and in the work On the Synod. I have reported entire in Vol. VIII, Book 3, dissertation 2, chapter 6, the decrees of the Supreme Pontiffs and of the Sacred Congregation of the Council of Trent upon this argument, which you can see there. Now I shall resolve certain little questions.

II. QUESTION I. By whom is the alms to be conferred upon a priest celebrating Mass to be fixed? ANSWER. By the bishop, as the Congregation of the Council determined, since a general rule cannot be prescribed. If a priest exact more alms than the bishop's fixing prescribes, he injures not only the law of the Church but commutative justice itself. Nor is it required, as all theologians teach, that the alms suffice for the entire sustenance of one day, because the action of the Sacrifice does not require the whole day but half an hour. Wherefore secular priests are not promoted to sacred Orders without a title either of patrimony or of benefice.

III. QUESTION II. Is it lawful for a rich priest to accept an alms that he may celebrate Mass? ANSWER. If several ancient canons be consulted, they seem to grant an alms to a priest about to celebrate on account of sustenance; but the universal custom of the Church, by which one must always stand, permits to all priests indiscriminately an alms for a Mass to be celebrated. Which custom rests upon holy Scripture, since St. Luke says, chapter 10: For the labourer is worthy of his hire; and St. Paul, 1 Corinthians 9: Know you not, that they who work in the holy place eat the things that are of the holy place; and they that serve the altar partake with the altar? Let the Apostle's whole chapter be read. That priests are rich or poor is, as regards this, by accident. He that serveth the altar, let him live by the altar.

IV. QUESTION III. What priests in celebrating afford a suspicion of simony? ANSWER. Those who, the alms being lacking, desist from celebrating. For the author of the opusculum On the Office of a Priest, chapter 1, once attributed to St. Thomas, says: A priest nevertheless cannot celebrate with this intention, that from it he may obtain money, for he would sin mortally. Very easily do many flatter themselves, and study to disguise this intention with various pretexts. But let priests consult their own fervour, and the profit which they take from celebration, and hence, when they will not lie to themselves, they will gather whether they celebrate principally for the end of the Sacrifice, or for the gaining of bread.

V. QUESTION IV. Can a priest celebrate through another, retaining for himself part of the stipend accepted? ANSWER. Many affirm it, whose opinion Alexander VII condemned, no. 9: After the decree of Urban, a priest to whom Masses to be celebrated are delivered can satisfy through another, a lesser stipend being conferred upon him, another part of the stipend being retained for himself. Fr. Viva upon this proposition 9, no. 8, reports the lax opinion of Bordoni asserting that the aforesaid priest does not sin against justice, but only against the obedience owed to the Pontiff: upon which opinion Fr. Viva brings forth this most probabilistic judgment: Although this is not without its own probability, it seems nevertheless more probable, and so forth. If that opinion is not without its own probability, then by force of Probabilism it can be committed to execution.

VI. Fr. Tamburini, Book 3, Method of the Mass, chapter 1, § 5, no. 15, says: “If a man, being a procurator that a hundred Masses, for example, be celebrated, which Masses in this city are wont to be said for, say, two hundred julii: if a man, I say, by his own industry send or go to another city, where within the demanded time they may be said for a hundred julii, I think it not improbable that such a procurator can retain for himself the other hundred. The reason is that a parity can be taken from a servant who by extraordinary industry (for to the ordinary and moral he is obliged by his very service), by his own labour buys things at less than they are commonly worth in the market: for he can retain what is over, as being the fruit of his own industry. In a like way therefore in our case.” A most witty comparison of profane service with the procurators to whom the care of Masses to be celebrated is committed! All things become lawful by the probable and by the non-probable. The filthiest gain is insinuated in the very celebration of Masses. A Christian man would scarcely think such things, did he not meet those writings. Servants let out their labours to their master. Wherefore it can scarcely, or at least rarely, happen that they can gain for themselves by extraordinary industry, since the time to be laid out in extraordinary industry has been sold to the master. But even granting the servant's gain, to extend it to procurators of Masses seems to abhor from truth and honesty.

VII. Fr. Dominic Viva in his Treatise on Proposition 9 of Alexander VII, no. 8, says: “If collectors of alms for Masses be priests, and Masses to be celebrated be not delivered to them, but they bear themselves as laymen who take care of the celebration of Masses, they will be able, from Navarrus, Córdoba, and Tamburini, probably against Pellizzari and Soto, to take a moderate wage for their labour out of what is given for the Mass, since this seems lawful by the law of nature.” Good heavens! The law of nature permits that out of the offerings conferred by the faithful for the most sacred Sacrifice of the Mass to be celebrated, priests take a wage, provided that in collecting the alms they bear themselves as laymen and not as priests! The practice of both opinions, of Tamburini and Viva, Benedict XIV prohibited in his Constitution 21, whose beginning is Quanta cura, where among other things these things are had: There are forbidden traffickings upon the alms of Masses; that is, those who collect alms in those places in which the stipends or alms for Masses are of a greater price, but take care that the Masses be celebrated in places in which they are wont to be celebrated for a lesser price: if they be laymen, let them incur excommunication; but if clerics or priests, suspension to be absolved by the Roman Pontiff alone. See also what the same Pontiff writes, Book 5, On the Synod, chapter 8, no. 9, and chapter 9, no. 2.

VIII. A beneficiary, when he is compelled to celebrate through another, can lawfully afford the accustomed alms, although he himself perceive a greater one from the benefice, as the Sacred Congregation determined. In those Masses therefore which they call manual, it is forbidden to celebrate through others, a lesser stipend being conferred than was accepted. When a man commits a Mass to be celebrated to a priest instructed with singular uprightness, a greater stipend being conferred, he ought not to celebrate through another, even the whole stipend being conferred. Several other little questions some raise here, which savour of trafficking and bring in disgust.

IX. A priest who accepts scanty stipends from several, promising a Mass to each, cannot satisfy with one Mass alone. Fr. Viva, question 5, last article, no. 9, says: “But Trullench and Tamburini, Book 3, chapter 1, § 3, think probable the opinion of Suárez teaching that in that case this can be granted to a poor priest, when, compelled by poverty, he consents.” This opinion was disapproved on the 14th by a decree of the Sacred Congregation. Fr. Viva heaps up many things from Tamburini and other probabilists, to show that the decree of the Sacred Congregation is not opposed to the opinion of Suárez; but at no. 10 he confesses with de Lugo that by the decree of the Congregation it is forbidden that the opinion of Fr. Suárez be reduced to practice. And at last, contrary to his custom, he concludes: I judge in the third place that the opinion of Suárez is false.

X. QUESTION V. Can a priest accept a twofold stipend — one for the attendance, as it is called, at a designated church, the other for the application? ANSWER. De Lugo and Tamburini affirm it, provided it be established that the one willed only the presence, the other only the application. Fr. La Croix reports for this opinion Suárez, Vásquez, Pasqualigo, Aversa, and others, and himself after his manner brings forth nothing.

XI. But the Supreme Pontiff Benedict XIV, Vol. 5, note 15, reports a decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Council of the 9th of January and the 6th of February in the year 1617, which contains this. Whether priests who under no other obligation celebrate in confraternities or in monasteries of nuns than for the adornment of the church, or that the confraternity brothers or the nuns may satisfy the precept of hearing Mass, can accept beyond the stipend which they receive from the confraternities or the nuns another stipend? The Sacred Congregation of the Council on the 9th of January and the 6th of February in the year 1617, in the Traguriensian case, answered that they cannot.

XII. A priest cannot receive a twofold stipend, one for the fruit of impetration of the Mass, another for the fruit of satisfaction, whatever some may formerly have devised to the contrary. He who accepted a stipend for a Mass to be celebrated where and when he shall have willed, if someone afterwards ask him to celebrate at a certain place or time, can he accept something for such an obligation? There are those who affirm it: to me subtle figments of this kind seem tinged with the soot of a base trafficking. Similarly I do not approve the opinion of Fr. La Croix, Book 6, part 2, no. 141, which he reports from Fr. Gobat in these words: If nevertheless it be agreed concerning the most special fruit, or another part of the fruit not sought, to be applied to a third party, that it may profit him as much as it can, that something can therefore be taken Gobat notes, no. 52, provided he warn the giver of the uncertainty whether such an application profit him. Distinctions of this kind in a most grave matter I do not approve.

XIII. QUESTION VI. Can several obligations be satisfied by a single Mass? ANSWER. Although Urban VIII, Supreme Pontiff, forbade this, there have not therefore been lacking those who maintained the opposite. Their opinion Alexander VII proscribed in this thesis 10: It is not against justice to accept a stipend for several sacrifices and to offer one sacrifice; neither is it against fidelity, even if I promise, by a promise confirmed even by an oath, to him who gives the stipend, that I will offer it for no other. Let the reader observe that this thesis was maintained and devised by certain Catholics, and let him seriously consider what can be expected from them in controverted matters, if against a truth so clear they could write such things. You promised, you swore that you would sacrifice for no other; nevertheless you sacrifice, and do not sin even against fidelity? Did Socrates, Plato, Cicero, Seneca, or Plutarch ever write such things?

XIV. When a man has accepted stipends for Masses to be celebrated, he ought not long to defer the celebration. Diana, de Lugo, and Pasqualigo teach that it cannot be deferred beyond three months. Urban VIII forbids in his decree that more Masses be accepted than can be celebrated within a small time. But the time of three months does not seem small. The quantity of time cannot be defined; but the circumstances, and especially the wills of the offerers and the necessities for the relieving of which the Masses are prescribed, are to be attended to. He who cannot celebrate the Masses for which he accepted stipends ought to furnish that which he can. He ought to admonish the offerers, if circumstances permit, that they take care that the Masses be celebrated. But his reputation is injured. Alas, wretched man! You squander your reputation by iniquitous actions which misbecome a priest of Christ; and when satisfaction must be made to God and to your neighbour, do you set your reputation against it?

XV. He who has vowed to offer a sacrifice for thanksgiving cannot accept a stipend, because he is presumed to have had this intention. He who accepted a stipend that he might celebrate a Mass of Requiem does not gravely sin if he celebrate another Mass; nevertheless, when the rubrics permit, faith is to be kept with the offerer, and he is to be warned that such a Mass cannot be celebrated. The anticipated celebration of Masses — namely, that a Mass to be celebrated tomorrow be celebrated today — since it is to the offerer's advantage, lacks fault, unless the offerer's intention be otherwise. He who is bound to celebrate every day can once in the week for reverence' sake omit it; he cannot nevertheless accept a stipend and celebrate for another. He who by the burden of a chaplaincy is bound to celebrate daily, if on account of the crimes of pollution, fornication, drunkenness, and so forth he be suspended by his confessor as unworthy, ought to fulfil his burden through another priest.

XVI. When a testator of a chaplaincy does not prescribe the number of Masses, it is better to consult the bishop. If a chaplain be sick, for about two months authors commonly free him from celebrating through another. But that priests may be freed from every doubt, the synodal laws or approved customs of each diocese are to be consulted. Too lax is the opinion which frees a chaplain from the burden of celebrating for the whole time in which he is sick. He who labours under the falling sickness ought to abstain from celebration. If he fall rarely, let the bishop be consulted, who, all things being regarded, may decide.

XVII. The intention of applying the Mass for the offerers is required. A habitual one does not suffice, whatever some may say; nor is an actual one necessary; but a virtual one suffices. Neither lawful nor valid is the application of a Mass for him whom God knows will first give a stipend; and La Croix says from Bassaeus that Clement VIII forbade this, which decree I have not seen.

XVIII. The reduction of Masses Benedict XIV set in full light, Book 5, On the Synod, chapter 10, where after many indicated decrees of Pontiffs he concludes: “Nevertheless after Urban VIII other Roman Pontiffs — namely Alexander VII, Clement X, Clement XI, Innocent XII, and Benedict XIII — granted to almost all religious institutes the privilege that the superiors general, mature counsel being employed and certain rules being observed which are expressed in the letters of the same privileges, could each in his own religious order moderate the burdens of Masses previously left and accepted: and the same faculty was made by Benedict XIII of holy memory to all bishops who by themselves or by their procurators were present at the Roman Council held in 1725, as may be seen in the same Council, title 15, chapter 8.”

XIX. QUESTION VII. On what days ought those who bear the care of souls to apply the Mass for the flock committed to them? ANSWER. Various disputations were formerly among authors upon this matter. All these the most learned Pontiff Benedict XIV, happily reigning, took away in his encyclical letter upon the parochial and conventual Mass, whose beginning is Cum semper oblatas, given in the year 1744. I have reported the entire letter in Vol. VIII, Book 3, dissertation 2, chapter 6. Now I transcribe a few words. We think it opportune to declare to your Fraternities that it will be abundantly enough for us, and consequently can be enough for you, that those who exercise the care of souls celebrate and apply the sacrifice of the Mass for the people on Sundays and on the other days of precept throughout the year. Read the entire letter, in which you will find most wholesome documents for parish priests. There are also rejected the excuses of those pastors who omitted to apply the Sacrifice on the said days for the flock committed to them on account of the slenderness of their revenues.

XX. QUESTION VIII. At what hour is it lawful to celebrate? ANSWER. From dawn until noon, as the common opinion teaches. Various causes can occur for anticipating or protracting this celebration by an hour. He who without cause violates the law of the prescribed time sins. I reckon that in this matter one rarely sins gravely, on account of the various customs of places.

XXI. QUESTION IX. When is it lawful to celebrate several times on the same day? ANSWER. Formerly priests celebrated several times. At present it is granted only on the day of the Nativity of the Lord to celebrate three Masses. No one nevertheless is bound to celebrate three. Several cases are wont to be assigned in which it is lawful to repeat Masses. If a parish priest have several parishes, and unless he celebrate several Masses some parish would lack a Mass, then, they say, he can double. But in our age, in which the supply of priests is most abundant, this necessity scarcely occurs.

XXII. QUESTION X. In what place is one to celebrate? ANSWER. In a church either consecrated, or at least blessed by the bishop, at an altar either consecrated or in which there is a consecrated stone. The bishop can impart a faculty of celebrating outside a church in some honourable place for a just cause. A bishop on a journey can celebrate at a portable altar, both in his own and in another's diocese. Upon which matter Clement XI published a decree in the year 1703, which I have reported entire in Vol. VIII, Book 3, dissertation 2, chapter 7. In a ship also it is lawful to celebrate, provided there be no danger of the blood being spilled.

XXIII. QUESTION XI. What is to be said of private oratories? ANSWER. The Council of Trent, session 22, On the Celebration of Mass, forbids that bishops permit celebration in private houses. Fr. La Croix, Book 6, part 1, no. 267, relates that bishops exercise the power of granting private oratories. In Italy this faculty of erecting oratories in the houses of seculars is granted by the Supreme Pontiff alone.

XXIV. In oratories of this kind it is forbidden to celebrate on the feasts of the Nativity of the Lord, of the Epiphany, of Easter, of Pentecost, of the Annunciation, of the Assumption, of the Apostles Peter and Paul, and of All Saints, unless it be otherwise expressed in the privilege.

XXV. They satisfy the precept of hearing Mass on a feast day in these private oratories all who dwell in the house of the privileged person, as father, mother, daughter-in-law, son-in-law, wife, sons, daughters, grandsons, great-grandsons, and others descending by the direct line and remaining under the government of the privileged person: in one word, all those and those alone who are expressed in the privilege. It were to be wished that Christians would sustain this inconvenience of visiting the supreme Lord in his own house. Not a few extort these privileges out of ostentation and out of sloth.

XXVI. Many probabilists — Azor, Castropalao, Pellizzari, Busembaum, Burghaber, Gobat, whom Fr. La Croix reports, Book 3, part 1, no. 618 — teach that even those who are not of the family satisfy the precept of hearing Mass on a feast day in private oratories of this kind, and La Croix himself calls their opinion probable. But this opinion is not probable but utterly false, and the Pontiff disapproves it in these words contained in the Bull: But we will that others who are not of the family be not reckoned free from the obligation of hearing Mass in a church. Many other interpretations I pass over.

XXVII. QUESTION XII. What is to be held concerning the consecration of a church and its pollution? ANSWER. A church can be blessed by a simple priest by commission of the bishop; it can be consecrated by the bishop alone. The Supreme Pontiff can commit to a simple priest that he consecrate a church.

XXVIII. A church is polluted: first, on account of a homicide perpetrated in it, even without the shedding of blood, or if a wound be so deadly that there or elsewhere death must follow. Second, by a public shedding of blood or of seed mortally evil, and consequently by a sacrilegious conjugal act. Third, by the burial of an excommunicated person to be shunned, or of an unbeliever. Fourth, by the destruction of the church, or the demolition of the greater part.

XXIX. An altar apt for sacrifice ought to have been consecrated by its own bishop, whether fixed or portable. The notable breaking of the same renders it execrated. If the stone be broken into two parts, of which each is apt to sustain the chalice, paten, and host, either can serve for an altar.

XXX. QUESTION XIII. Is a priest bound to offer Mass? ANSWER. All the faithful are bound by natural, divine, and ecclesiastical precept to offer sacrifice to God through public ministers. Therefore by the same right priests are bound, since these two things are reciprocal. See Vol. VIII, Book 3, dissertation 2, chapter 8. Cajetan on 3, question 82, article 10, taught that priests who rarely or never perform sacred rites sin only venially. This opinion as false and lax St. Pius V commanded to be struck out of Cajetan's commentaries.

XXXI. Parish priests and all who have the care of souls are bound by themselves, or, if they be hindered, through others, to celebrate as often as the faithful are bound to assist at Mass. Nor hence gather that these ought to celebrate on feast days alone: for since they are pastors, they are bound to celebrate if not daily, yet frequently, that by their example they may allure their sheep to receive the divine pasture. The other priests ought to celebrate at least on Sundays and the other feasts, as the Council of Trent, session 13, chapter 14, prescribes. On the other days let them celebrate more or less according to their greater or lesser fervour. Although formerly in time of persecution priests celebrated without a minister, nevertheless, persecution ceasing, the opposite discipline has always obtained of celebrating with a minister. Therefore of St. Sixtus St. Laurence said: Thou wast never wont to offer sacrifice without a minister.

Caius, a missionary priest in England, while occupied with spiritual exercises, is troubled by scruples about the obligation to celebrate Mass by reason of a stipend. He therefore goes to a confessor, to whom he relates that he is accustomed to accept more Masses to be celebrated for stipends than he can satisfy. He is unwilling, however, to hand the stipends to another priest; hence sometimes he retains the stipend but does not celebrate the Mass, which he hopes is not mortal because of the small amount, for it does not exceed two shillings and sixpence. Sometimes also he defers for four or six months the celebration of a Mass due by reason of a stipend. Indeed, if it concerns stipends handed over by a certain pious association established to promote devotion toward the souls in purgatory for the souls of the departed in general, without scruple he defers the due celebration of the Mass beyond six months. Hence it is asked:

1. Whence arises the obligation to celebrate Mass by reason of an accepted stipend, and is it a grave obligation?

2. Within what time must a Mass be celebrated by reason of a stipend?

3. What is to be said of the case?

1. Whence arises the obligation of saying Mass by reason of accepting a stipend, and is the obligation a grave one?

The obligation of saying Mass for the intention of the person who has given a stipend arises from a contract which the priest enters into with the giver, and from ecclesiastical law. It is not a contract of buying and selling, but an innominate contract — Do ut facias. The stipend is given for the support of the priest, and the priest undertakes to apply Mass for the intention of the giver. The obligation is a grave one of justice, as the nature of the obligation, the intention of the parties, and the law of the Church make manifest. Innocent XII commanded that “ absolutely let as many Masses be celebrated as shall have been prescribed by those offering alms.”

2. Within what time is Mass to be said for which a stipend has been given?

The decree S. C. C. Ut debita, 11th May 1904, answers this question:

“ A reasonable period for fulfilling obligations of manual Masses is one month for one Mass, six months for one hundred Masses, and another longer or shorter span of time, more or less according to the greater or smaller number of Masses.”

3. The case. In accepting more stipends for Masses than he can satisfy Caius transgressed the decree S. C. C., Ut debita, which prescribes:

“ It is lawful for no one to undertake so many Masses that he probably cannot himself satisfy them within a year from the day the obligation was undertaken.” In neglecting to celebrate Mass although bound to do so on account of having received a stipend for it Caius committed grave sin, and he is bound to restore the stipend to the giver if the occasion on account of which the Mass was asked for has now passed by, or otherwise to say the Mass as soon as possible. If he can not do this, he should hand over the stipends to his Ordinary, or to some reliable priest of the diocese. In deferring the celebration of Mass for which he has accepted a stipend much beyond a month he has committed so many grievous sins.

Caius, a Catholic, by will left his houses to Titius, a missionary priest in England, on the condition that in perpetuity twenty Masses should be celebrated each year for the repose of his soul. The annual rents arising from the houses then easily exceeded twenty pounds sterling, and so Titius gladly accepted the legacy. Within a few years, however, because of the dilapidation of the houses and because the neighborhood had become less respectable, Titius sorrowfully received scarcely a tenth part of the former sum each year. Hence he reduced the number of Masses to eight, so that one Mass remained for five shillings, the diocesan rate; indeed, he sent some to his friend Lucius to be celebrated, who gladly accepted half a crown for each Mass. Hence it is asked:

1. What are manual and funded Masses?

2. To whom does it belong to accept and reduce obligations of Masses?

3. Is it lawful to transfer to another the obligation of celebrating a Mass while retaining part of the stipend?

4. What is to be said of the case?

1. What are manual and funded Masses?

The distinction is explained in the decree S. C. C., Ut debita, May 11, 1904: “ The Sacred Congregation declares that by manual Masses in the present decree are understood and held all those which the faithful ask to be celebrated for an offered manual stipend, to whomever or in whatever manner they hand over this stipend, whether by direct hand or in wills, provided that they do not constitute a perpetual foundation, or one of such kind and so long-lasting that it ought to be regarded as perpetual.”

2. To whom does it belong to accept and to reduce the burden of Masses?

The Fourth Council of Westminster (d. X n. 11 says): “ Let the rectors of churches of the secular clergy remember that the right of imposing burdens of Masses upon churches, whether they are temporal or perpetual, belongs to the Bishop alone; and that burdens already imposed can neither be changed nor diminished without the Holy See having been consulted.” The consent of the bishop (or of the regular prelate for Religious) is not required for the validity, but only for the lawfulness of the transaction.¹

1 Gasparri, De Eucharistia, vol. i, n. 561.

3. Is it lawful to transfer the burden of saying Mass to another while retaining part of the stipend?

No, as a general rule. The decree Ut debita says: “ It is decreed that the stipend assigned by the faithful can never be separated from the celebration of the Mass, nor diverted to other things or diminished, but must be handed over to the celebrant in full and in its own kind.” In certain cases, however, it is not unlawful to retain part of the stipend, as, for example, when more than the ordinary sum has been given out of friendship, or other special reason, when the priest who says the Mass without being asked voluntarily foregoes part of the stipend, or when there is question not of manual but of funded Masses in the strict sense annexed to a church.²

2 Lehmkuhl, vol. ii, n. 281, 11th edition.

4. The case. Titius went beyond his powers when he accepted the legacy without the consent of the bishop, as is clear from what was said above. Titius still further exceeded his authority when he reduced the number of Masses to be said on account of the reduction of income from the property. He should have recourse to the Holy See, say what he has done, and ask what he is to do in the matter in future. Under the circumstances he did not do wrong in getting his friend Lucius to say some of the Masses for half-a-crown, which is commonly given as a stipend for Mass by the poor in England. No definite sum had been apportioned by the testator for the celebration of each Mass.

Caius, a priest, wrote to Titius, likewise a priest and the author of a theological book, and asked that a copy of the said book be sent to him. The author sent the book and at the same time wrote that the best manner of paying the price would be for Caius to celebrate five Masses, for he had more intentions than he could satisfy, and those five had already been in his hands for two months. Caius, however, doubts whether it is lawful for him to buy the book in this way; indeed, he thinks that Titius has offended against the decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Council of May 11, 1904. Hence it is asked:

1. How is it shown that it is lawful and honorable to accept stipends for Masses?

2. What did the Sacred Congregation of the Council determine on May 11, 1904, concerning the doubts to be treated in the case?

3. What is to be said of the case?

1. How is it shown that it is lawful to receive stipends or Masses?

The Mass is not sold for the stipend, but the priest undertakes to say a Mass for the intention of the person who asks for it. But it is only right and proper that one who occupies himself for the benefit of another, should receive his support or part of it from him for whose benefit he labors. A soldier fighting or training to do so for his country’s defence has a right to be supported meanwhile at his country’s expense. In the same way the stipend is given to the priest for his support by one who benefits spiritually by the priest’s celebration of Mass.

2. What did the S. C. C. decree May 11, 1904, bearing on the points in the case?

The decree S. C. C., Ut debita, contains the following: “ Almsgiving of the Mass can never be separated from the celebration of the Mass, nor be exchanged or diminished for other things, but must be handed over to the celebrant in full and in its own kind;” furthermore, “ to sell or buy books, sacred utensils or any other things and to enter into associations (as they call them) with newspapers and periodicals by means of Masses is unlawful and altogether prohibited. This, however, is valid not only if it is about Masses to be celebrated, but also about Masses already celebrated, whenever it passes into use and habit and tends to the benefit of some commerce.”

3. The case. Caius would seem to have interpreted the decree too strictly The decree indeed, forbids trading with stipends for Masses, and as a general rule prescribes that the whole stipend received for a Mass is to go to the priest who says the Mass. It is specially forbidden for booksellers to collect intentions for Masses and get them said by priests who receive books instead of the stipends. However, Titius did none of these things. He had some Masses to be said for stipends, and he was at liberty to ask Caius, if he knew him to be an honest priest, to say some of those Masses. Caius was indebted to Titius for the price of the book. It was lawful to square accounts without the necessity of sending money backwards and forwards. Fr. Lehmkuhl says: “Only if [a priest]

has surplus stipends not deliberately collected or who entrusts Masses to be celebrated to other priests with the right to the full stipends, but they, moved by another consideration, buy periodicals from him, it will be lawful to balance the account of what was given and received.”¹

1 Casus Conscientiae, vol. ii, n. 223.