Late For Mass

[Old_Joe]

While I realize that you should try to be on time for Mass, but what if there is sufficient reason where you can't help but be late? Is there a point in the Mass where showing up afterwards doesn't fulfill your Sunday Obligation?

[Thy Geekdom Come]

This is an article written by Zenit not long ago on this topic.

[url="http://www.zenit.org/english"]http://www.zenit.org/english[/url]

[b]Arriving After the Gospel: No Communion[/b]
And More on the Mass Intention

ROME, OCT. 23, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

Q: My parish priest made a regulation that anyone who arrives in Mass after the Gospel is not allowed to take Communion. According to him, the reason is that Jesus is "the Word made flesh." Therefore we must recognize Jesus in the Word before we recognize him in holy Communion. Another priest, who is a professor of liturgy, has another opinion. He said that people who arrive late in Mass with a valid reason (for example, an unusual traffic jam, attending sick children, etc.) should not be denied Communion. Could you please give a clarification on this matter? -- B.E., Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

A: We dealt with the question of late arrivals at Mass in one of our first columns, on Nov. 4 and Nov. 18, in 2003.

Then as now, I would agree more with the second priest: that someone who arrives late out of no fault of their own should not be denied Communion.

I also consider it unwise to set any barrier point; I continue to insist that the faithful should assist at the whole Mass.

It is quite possible that some members of the faithful could begin to see the Gospel as the cutoff moment and feel comfortable in habitually arriving for the second reading, thus assuring that the Mass is "valid."

It is true that the Mass is a whole and that we must first recognize Jesus in the Word before we recognize him in the Eucharist. But this would include the entire Liturgy of the Word and not just the Gospel.

Also, while there is some certain logic in choosing the Gospel as such a moment, the reasons given are not sufficiently well grounded from the theological, canonical and moral standpoints to support such a blanket impediment to receiving Communion.

The pastor has a duty to direct and inform the consciences of the faithful entrusted to him. And while I disagree with his suggesting the Gospel as a demarcation point for receiving Communion, it is at least clear that he his trying to perform his sacred duty.

Therefore, the onus of the decision whether or not to receive Communion, in this particular case of a late arrival, falls primarily upon the individual Catholic rather than upon the pastor who can hardly be expected to be attentive to every late arrival.

It is therefore incumbent on those arriving late to examine their conscience as to the reason behind their tardiness. If the reason is neglect or laziness, then they would do better attending another full Mass if this is possible. Even those who blamelessly arrive late should prefer to assist at a full Mass although they would be less bound to do so in conscience.

At the same time, there are some objective elements to be taken into account besides the reason for lateness. Someone who arrives after the consecration has not attended Mass, no matter what the reason for his belatedness. Such a person should not receive Communion, and if it is a Sunday, has the obligation to attend another Mass.

It is true that Communion may be received outside of Mass, so Mass is not an essential prerequisite for receiving Communion. This would not, however, justify arriving just in time for Communion at a weekday Mass, as all of the rites for receiving Communion outside of Mass include a Liturgy of the Word and one should attend the entire rite.

* * *

Follow-up: Mentioning the Mass Intention

After our commentaries on reading out Mass intentions (Oct. 9) a priest observed: "At a concelebrated Mass, each concelebrant conceivably has a separate Mass intention. At my monastery, we have daily concelebration, and we have a policy of never mentioning any Mass intention at Mass. Otherwise, it could happen that if one Mass intention is mentioned by the presiding celebrant, someone may be present who has requested a different intention from one of the concelebrants, and would have the impression that the requested intention was not fulfilled."

This is certainly a legitimate policy given the circumstances. There might be particular occasions, however, when the fact that several priests are concelebrating specifically allows for more than one intention to be mentioned, provided that the faithful know that each intention will be entrusted to a different priest.

Even though only one Mass is celebrated at a concelebration, each priest legitimately celebrates a Mass and may receive a stipend for the corresponding intention.

There is, however, a strict norm that a priest may never receive a stipend for a concelebrated Mass if he celebrates, or more rarely concelebrates, another Mass on the same day.

For example, if our correspondent, besides concelebrating at the community Mass in the monastery, were to also celebrate for the people at some other time, he could only accept a stipend for the second Mass.

He could have any number of personal intentions to offer at the community Mass, but none associated with a stipend.

* * *

Readers may send questions to liturgy@zenit.org. Please put the word "Liturgy" in the subject field. The text should include your initials, your city and your state, province or country. Father McNamara can only answer a small selection of the great number of questions that arrive.