| Author | |
folklaur
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2816
|
| Posted: Dec 29 2009 at 4:03pm | IP Logged
|
 |
|
Can this be?
Jan 1st is NOT a holy day in my diocese. a few churches have extra masses anyway (our parish does, but it seems to be just barely tolerated by the diocese) but like DH's first year here, when he went to the Cathedral, the priest even made a point of saying that it was NOT a holy day (and yet the church was packed. huh. go figure. guess all those tourists were from places where it is. like, um, everywhere else in the US, i thought?!?!)
i know about it falling on a Saturday or a Monday. But this year, it's a Friday, and last year, it was a Thursday. nope, still isn't.
i asked in my Catholic homeschool group, and i got a very confusing response.
i found a bulletin from the cathedral, that said, that Jan 1 is abrogated annually according to a Provincial Decision of the Bishops of Region XI.
but i can find nothing else on that.
is a "Provincial Decision" the same as "prior approval of the Apostolic See" like canon 1246 says is necessary?
help?
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
SuzanneG
Forum Moderator
Joined: June 17 2006
Location: Idaho
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5465
|
| Posted: Dec 29 2009 at 4:13pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Laura~
Not answering your questions directly, but I asked about this Holy Day of Ob last year and there were some links and good info in this thread:
Jan. 1 - Mary, Mother of God
__________________
Suzanne in ID
Wife to Pete
Mom of 7 (Girls - 14, 12, 11, 9, 7 and Boys - 4, 1)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MrsM
Forum Pro
Joined: May 05 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 202
|
| Posted: Dec 29 2009 at 4:16pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Well, I just went and looked up the info for my diocese, and to my surprise it said the same thing! Here's a quote from the website:
Note:
Bishop Soto has determined that, in accord with the other dioceses the province of northern
California, the obligation to attend Mass on January 1, 2010, the Solemnity of Mary, the
Mother of God, is dispensed for the Diocese of Sacramento.
__________________
Lynn in California
Homeschooling dd13, dd11, ds10, and ds8
Mom to Miracle Baby ds3
Mom to darling Elizabeth and Francis, held in Mary's arms and always in my heart
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Nina Murphy
Forum All-Star
Joined: May 18 2006
Location: California
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1546
|
| Posted: Dec 29 2009 at 4:44pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I'm in the same Diocese, and yes, Bishop Soto has dispensed the holy day.
I think we are down to like, two Holy Days---Christmas and the Immaculate Conception.
This is what my husband says when we get into these heated (oh I mean, lively  ) discussions around the dinner table concerning changes in disciplinary things (like the H1N1 policies implemented, etc. etc.) : It is STILL a first-class feast, that hasn't changed, our requirement to attend under burden of sin, has. GOD is the same and the honor and glory owed to Him will never change but we are now considered "EXTRA-ordinary", it is not the ordinary requirement or a loss of credit to us.....but choosing to do "extra", in a sense. Which must please God and give us more points! 
No seriously, if not required, it becomes more of a choice in the will and therefore a choice to love and choose God....becomes almost "heroic" in these present days, and then how God is pleased by our choice then! SO, if looked at this way, it can be turned to a good, and an opportunity for grace. I hope----this is the way we choose to explain these *loosenings* to our kids. The burden is being lifted off of the faithful. It becomes going above and beyond. Hopefully it doesn't lead to indifferentism and loss of faith and Catholic identity/purpose in most hearts and minds.
__________________
God bless,
~~Nina
mother of 9 on earth,
and 2 yet-to-be-met
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Paula in MN
Forum All-Star
Joined: Nov 25 2006
Location: Minnesota
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4064
|
| Posted: Dec 29 2009 at 4:49pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
This is where I get confused. If the Pope says it is a Holy Day of Obligation, how can a Bishop turn around and say it isn't for his diocese? It is a Holy Day of Obligation here, although we have the choice of going Thursday afternoon or Friday morning.
And this is kind of off topic, but is every church supposed to offer daily and Saturday Mass?
__________________
 Paula
A Catholic Harvest
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
JodieLyn
Forum Moderator
Joined: Sept 06 2006
Location: Oregon
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 12234
|
| Posted: Dec 29 2009 at 4:59pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Paula I don't have an answer for that.. I don't know that anyone does really.
But I found this Canon 1246
That also gives the information on the Solemnity of the Ascension being moved to the 7th Sunday of Easter instead of the Thursday prior to that. If anyone else happened to be wondering about that too.
__________________
Jodie, wife to Dave
G-18, B-17, G-15, G-14, B-13, B-11, G-9, B-7, B-5, B-4
All men who have turned out worth anything have had the chief hand in their own education.
-Sir Walter Scott
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
JodieLyn
Forum Moderator
Joined: Sept 06 2006
Location: Oregon
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 12234
|
| Posted: Dec 29 2009 at 5:04pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Paula in MN wrote:
| is every church supposed to offer daily and Saturday Mass? |
|
|
I didn't have a lot of time to look around.. it appears to me that it's ENCOURAGED but not required. And you do need to take limitations of the priests into consideration. For instance, here in order to get to the further out missions for a Saturday vigil Mass, Father does not have a Saturday daily Mass.
__________________
Jodie, wife to Dave
G-18, B-17, G-15, G-14, B-13, B-11, G-9, B-7, B-5, B-4
All men who have turned out worth anything have had the chief hand in their own education.
-Sir Walter Scott
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MicheleQ
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 23 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2193
|
| Posted: Dec 29 2009 at 5:33pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Paula in MN wrote:
| This is where I get confused. If the Pope says it is a Holy Day of Obligation, how can a Bishop turn around and say it isn't for his diocese? |
|
|
Because a Bishop does have the power to make this kind of decision. Perhaps this excerpt from a Catholic Answers article about Bishops might help in understanding:
Quote:
The bishop enjoys the fullness of the sacrament of holy orders (cf. Lumen Gentium 26) and as such is head of the local Church, the diocese. A bishop’s authority within his diocese does not operate by delegation: The bishop is not merely exercising a power "borrowed" from the pope. Canon 381 of the Code of Canon Law states: "In the diocese entrusted to his care, the diocesan bishop has all the ordinary, proper, and immediate power required for the exercise of his pastoral office." The Second Vatican Council’s Dogmatic Constitution on the Church explains:
The pastoral charge . . . is entrusted to {the bishops} fully; nor are they to be regarded as vicars of the Roman pontiff, for they exercise the power that they possess in their own right and are called in the truest sense of the term prelates of the people whom they govern (LG 27).
A bishop, then, should not be thought of as a middle-level executive, carrying out the instructions of his Vatican superiors. Each bishop governs his diocese in and by virtue of his own authority. The policies and directives of each diocese are not set in Rome, to be executed by local officials. Bishops are not employees of the pope, and they do not have to get approval from higher authority for the vast majority of their decisions. While each bishop is accountable to the Holy Father and the whole college of bishops, the terms of that accountability are actually quite narrow. |
|
|
__________________
Michele Quigley
wife to my prince charming and mom of 10 in Lancaster County, PA USA
http://michelequigley.com
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
folklaur
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2816
|
| Posted: Dec 29 2009 at 6:16pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
MicheleQ wrote:
Paula in MN wrote:
| This is where I get confused. If the Pope says it is a Holy Day of Obligation, how can a Bishop turn around and say it isn't for his diocese? |
|
|
Because a Bishop does have the power to make this kind of decision. Perhaps this excerpt from a Catholic Answers article about Bishops might help in understanding |
|
|
i understand that. i do. but - wouldn't Canon 1246 be Canon Law that specifically says that "prior approval of the Apostolic See" kind of mean that in this case, it isn't up to *just* the Bishop?
and - does anyone know? like i asked in the OP - is a "Provincial Decision" the same as "prior approval of the Apostolic See"?
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MicheleQ
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 23 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2193
|
| Posted: Dec 29 2009 at 6:28pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
cactus mouse wrote:
i understand that. i do. but - wouldn't Canon 1246 be Canon Law that specifically says that "prior approval of the Apostolic See" kind of mean that in this case, it isn't up to *just* the Bishop?
and - does anyone know? like i asked in the OP - is a "Provincial Decision" the same as "prior approval of the Apostolic See"?
|
|
|
I don't know the difference though I would think there is one but, are you sure that prior approval hasn't been given?
__________________
Michele Quigley
wife to my prince charming and mom of 10 in Lancaster County, PA USA
http://michelequigley.com
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
folklaur
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2816
|
| Posted: Dec 29 2009 at 6:56pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
MicheleQ wrote:
cactus mouse wrote:
i understand that. i do. but - wouldn't Canon 1246 be Canon Law that specifically says that "prior approval of the Apostolic See" kind of mean that in this case, it isn't up to *just* the Bishop?
and - does anyone know? like i asked in the OP - is a "Provincial Decision" the same as "prior approval of the Apostolic See"?
|
|
|
I don't know the difference though I would think there is one but, are you sure that prior approval hasn't been given? |
|
|
nope, not sure. the lit from the Bishop and the diocese just talk about this "provincial decision."
i am having a hard time ferreting out more on the internet (or a lot more about pd in general...)
but it seems that NV is hooked to California as far as Ecclesiastical Provinces go.
and it is much, much different than AZ/NM.
sigh.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
KauaiCatholic
Forum All-Star
Joined: April 25 2009
Location: Hawaii
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 535
|
| Posted: Dec 29 2009 at 7:01pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
wow ... lots of good info and much to ponder! thanks, everybody.
our priest addressed this on Sunday by explaining that many years ago, our diocese had requested and was granted a special dispensation so Jan. 1 was no longer considered a holy day of obligation (although with his thick Filipino accent, or perhaps on purpose, he pronounces it "holiday" of obligation, which I like). but he sort of recited it all in a bland, factual tone quite unlike his normal voice. he then (much more animatedly) encouraged all of us to celebrate Mass with him that day to start the blessed New Year off right.
I now appreciate his comments even more: he stayed true to the letter of the diocesan directive but made it very clear where his heart lies.
__________________
Viviane
Grateful mama of Jonah Augustine ('01), Sophia Marie ('05) and Luke Dominic ('10)
We can do no great things; only small things with great love. -- Blessed Teresa of Calcutta
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
folklaur
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2816
|
| Posted: Dec 29 2009 at 7:13pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
KauaiCatholic wrote:
wow ... lots of good info and much to ponder! thanks, everybody.
our priest addressed this on Sunday by explaining that many years ago, our diocese had requested and was granted a special dispensation so Jan. 1 was no longer considered a holy day of obligation (although with his thick Filipino accent, or perhaps on purpose, he pronounces it "holiday" of obligation, which I like). but he sort of recited it all in a bland, factual tone quite unlike his normal voice. he then (much more animatedly) encouraged all of us to celebrate Mass with him that day to start the blessed New Year off right.
I now appreciate his comments even more: he stayed true to the letter of the diocesan directive but made it very clear where his heart lies. |
|
|
yes - i was able to find out about Hawaii on wiki, even:
Quote:
| Note 2: In Hawaii, in 1992, the Bishop of Honolulu, pursuant to an indult from the Holy See, established the Feast of the Immaculate Conception and Christmas as the only Holy Days of Obligation to be observed in the state. |
|
|
now i know Hawaii is in the same Ecclesiastical Province as CA and NV.
but, that is what is making me pull my hair out. it was easy to find the info on Hawaii in particular. why is it so hard to find the same for NV? gr. argh.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
lambchopwife
Forum Pro
Joined: Aug 23 2007
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 105
|
| Posted: Dec 29 2009 at 8:41pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I just think that this whole thing is so sad. I'm sitting here thinking why would any Bishop want to change this from a Holy day of Obligation to one that's not. My only thinking is that this gives some Catholics the excuse to go and party the night before and not worry about Mass in the morning. I think the only thing that this could do for the church is hurt it. It makes for lazy Catholics and less due worship to God. I have a major problem with some Bishops who like to change things like this around, it's not better for anyone it's taking the easy way out. Please forgive my frustration ladies. It's just that I am in a very liberal diocese and these things just really make me sad.
God bless,
Cheryl
__________________
~ Be not afraid to tell Jesus that you love Him; even though it be without feeling, this is the way to oblige Him to help you, and carry you like a little child too feeble to walk.~ St. Therese
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
guitarnan
Forum Moderator
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: Maryland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10883
|
| Posted: Dec 29 2009 at 9:56pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
We are not dispensed in the Archdiocese of Baltimore. January 1 is a holy day.
__________________
Nancy in MD. Mom of ds (24) & dd (18); 31-year Navy wife, move coordinator and keeper of home fires. Writer and dance mom.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MicheleQ
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 23 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2193
|
| Posted: Dec 29 2009 at 10:25pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
It is sad and I do often wonder at the why of it.
It is a holyday of obligation for us here in the Harrisburg diocese and always has been. I hope it will remain so in the future as we are losing our good Bishop. May God's will be done --always!
__________________
Michele Quigley
wife to my prince charming and mom of 10 in Lancaster County, PA USA
http://michelequigley.com
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
leanne maree
Forum All-Star
Joined: July 25 2008
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 508
|
| Posted: Dec 29 2009 at 10:34pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
It is not a Holy day of Obligation here in Australia -in our doiceses- either.
Our priest last weekend announced that he would be celebrating Mass and would love us all to join him.
Leanne
__________________
God is Love
Leanne
Loving wife to Dermot and Adoring mother to Louise, Kristie, Kieran & Brid
http://leannemaree.blogspot.com/
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
JodieLyn
Forum Moderator
Joined: Sept 06 2006
Location: Oregon
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 12234
|
| Posted: Dec 29 2009 at 10:45pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I'm less concerned with the lack of *obligation* than that it's so hard for someone to choose to attend Mass on these special Holy Days.
It can be a very good thing that it's no longer an obligation. It's pointed out above
Nina Murphy wrote:
| it becomes more of a choice in the will and therefore a choice to love and choose God....becomes almost "heroic" in these present days, and then how God is pleased by our choice then! SO, if looked at this way, it can be turned to a good, and an opportunity for grace |
|
|
Plus those that are luke-warm are not burdened with another sin on their soul since the obligation to attend has been removed.
Certainly, making things "easier" isn't always the best way but sometimes it helps, especially if people feel overburdened and more likely to skip Sunday and get lazy about coming on Sunday because of all the "extra" days.
__________________
Jodie, wife to Dave
G-18, B-17, G-15, G-14, B-13, B-11, G-9, B-7, B-5, B-4
All men who have turned out worth anything have had the chief hand in their own education.
-Sir Walter Scott
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
folklaur
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2816
|
| Posted: Dec 29 2009 at 10:47pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
JodieLyn wrote:
Plus those that are luke-warm are not burdened with another sin on their soul since the obligation to attend has been removed.
Certainly, making things "easier" isn't always the best way but sometimes it helps, especially if people feel overburdened and more likely to skip Sunday and get lazy about coming on Sunday because of all the "extra" days. |
|
|
oh, hey, i like this perspective.
but goodness....normal daily mass time is killer since DH works nights....but, we manage....
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MaryM
Board Moderator
Joined: Feb 11 2005
Location: Colorado
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 13104
|
| Posted: Dec 30 2009 at 3:03am | IP Logged
|
|
|
As has been indicated in several posts already, it is a great witness to the beauty of our faith if we go even when the obligation is dispensed. Though it is sad and frustrating that in those diocese it can be difficult to find a Mass for those who do wish to go and not be dispensed.
There is a current discussion on this topic in the comments section of Fr. Z's WDTPRS blog for anyone interested. WDTPRS-Reminder -1 January - Holy Day of Obligation
It seems (though it is hard to find "the" actual documentation) that an individual bishop may dispense the obligation of a particular Holy Day in his diocese “for cause” (this would fall into authority descriptions provided by Michele above) – but he can't do this permanently - meaning he can't abrogate it. It seems that they just dispense each year on a year to year basis as a way to do this legitimately and get around the USCCB guidelines which limit it to dispensing only when it falls on Saturday or Monday.
From what I know, since 2002 the Archbishops of Los Angeles and San Francisco and several other Diocese within those provinces have done this each year, which deviates from the calendar of Holy Days observed by the rest of the Church in the United States and the guidelines voted on by the USCCB.
It is discussed here at Adoremus Bulletin at that time (and part quoted below).
Quote:
A November 30 communication to the priests of Los Angeles from Monsignor Terrance Fleming, the archdiocesan Moderator of the Curia/Vicar General, announced that Cardinal Roger Mahony was "dispensing parishioners in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles from the obligation to attend mass on Tuesday, 1 January 2002, the Solemnity of Mary, Mother of God, which is normally a Holy Day of Obligation".
The Los Angeles announcement to priests did not mention authorization from the Holy See for this change.
Archbishop William Levada of San Francisco also abrogated the January 1 Holy Day of obligation. Adoremus received several reports that bishops of other West Coast dioceses acted similarly. |
|
|
cactus mouse wrote:
| is a "Provincial Decision" the same as "prior approval of the Apostolic See" like canon 1246 says is necessary? |
|
|
I believe a "Provincial Decision" refers only to a decision made by the bishops of a "Province." It would not be "prior approval of the Apostolic See."
Several diocese are collectively part of a province. The Province of Los Angeles includes the Archdiocese of LA and the dioceses of Fresno, Monterey, Orange, San Bernardino and San Diego; The Province of San Francisco includes the Archdiocese of the San Francisco and the dioceses of Honolulu, Las Vegas, Oakland, Reno, Sacramento, Salt Lake City, San Jose, Santa Rosa and Stockton. So these are the diocese that are usually affected by joining in on this particular Holy Day issue.
It is still a holy day of obligation for the US, the obligation is dispensed by the bishop in those diocese. They can't change what it is, even though the wording they use may make it sound like it is. As you see in searching the topic around the web, there is great variation around the world on which days are observed as Holy Days of Obligation and which are dispensed from obligation or even abrogated. I wish the Universal Church would celebrate the these days on the same day together. How beautiful would that be - is there a wishful thinking emoticon...
In reading some past USCCB minutes where talk of moving or dispensing Holy Day obligations has been discussed, you do see reference to reasoning being "pastoral needs of the diocese" though not spelled out in specifics. It likely is different for different diocese. Because there are no reasons listed on the diocesan sites in question it is speculation to try to determine. Though we may not agree with any reasoning proposed and feel frustrated, seeing that this causes confusion to the faithful and takes away from the great importance of these liturgical celebrations, we ask that all members remember our forum guidelines which state we must give special care when writing about ordained clergy, which includes Bishops.
__________________
Mary M. in Denver
Our Domestic Church
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
|
|
4Real Forums : Domestic Church
Topic: HELP!!!! is this right? can it be?
