ROME, JAN. 25, 2011 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.
Q: Regarding the genuflections during the old rite, would a profound bow suffice for a priest suffering from arthritis, etc.? I am 70 years young, and was ordained according to the new rite and have never celebrated Mass in the old rite. One of my biggest joys will be to celebrate Mass using the old rite. I am also a Dominican tertiary priest. Can I use the Dominican rite? — F.A.C., Comayagua, Honduras
A: The Code of Canon Law covers the case of priests with physical limitations. To wit:
«Can. 930 §1. If an infirm or elderly priest is unable to stand, he can celebrate the eucharistic sacrifice while seated, but not before the people except with the permission of the local ordinary; the liturgical laws are to be observed.
«§2. A blind or otherwise infirm priest licitly celebrates the eucharistic sacrifice by using any approved text of the Mass with the assistance, if needed, of another priest, deacon, or even a properly instructed lay person.»
These canons specifically refer to the present rite but are probably applicable to the extraordinary form. In the case of doubt one can always have recourse to the local ordinary as Canon 930 codifies faculties granted to bishops in 1963. Before this date it was necessary to have recourse to the Holy See which, however, habitually granted such favors.
The novelty is that the code allows the infirm priest to decide himself if his condition merits remaining seated while celebrating Mass alone or with one or few attendants.
I believe that the same basic rule would apply — for both forms of the Roman rite — in the case of omitting or substituting gestures such as genuflections when a priest is impeded by some physical limitation. Even young priests can sometimes have injuries which make it practically impossible to perform these gestures, and this should not prevent them from being able to celebrate Mass.
Once more, each priest can decide for himself how best to proceed when celebrating alone. He can probably also make an ad hoc decision with respect to Mass for the people in the case of a short-term impediment. If the impediment is long term or permanent, he should ask the bishop’s permission and explain his situation to parishioners.
The venerable Dominican rite, a form of celebrating Mass that was proper to the Order of Preachers, is no longer in general use. In 1968 the general chapter of the religious order opted to adopt the reformed Roman rite of Paul VI. The old rite was not abolished, however, and Dominican provincials may grant permission to their subjects to celebrate according to its provisions. I do not know if this authority extends to tertiary priests, and it would be necessary to consult the local provincial to find out.
* * *
Follow-up: A Service as a Substitute for Mass
A reader from Grand Rapids, Michigan, sought some clarifications in pursuance to our reply regarding the legitimacy of organizing a Communion service as a substitute for the Saturday vigil Mass (see Jan. 11). In the case at hand, the pastor was apparently unable to find a priest to celebrate this Mass although the other Masses on Sunday were held. He did not inform ahead of time that there would only be a Communion service.
Our reader made the following comments:
«I believe the correspondent is questioning if: 1) Since there are ample opportunities in their area to attend a Vigil Mass, shouldn’t their parish priest have canceled the liturgy that day rather than have a deacon celebrate a Communion service? 2) In any case, shouldn’t the parishioners have had advance warning that the vigil Mass was not going to be a Mass but instead a Communion service (because the priest knew ahead of time that he did not have another priest available, and could have informed the parish), thus allowing them to attend an actual Vigil Mass at a neighboring parish, if they so chose.
«My question is: 1) Did they in fact fulfill their Sunday obligation by attending the Communion service, since they did not have advance warning? 2) Or should they have attempted to attend a Mass on Sunday, since they knew on Sunday that they had only attended a Communion service the afternoon/night before?
«My opinion is that to prevent just this sort of confusion, the pastor and/or bishop should cancel Mass at a particular parish and ask that parishioners attend Mass at another parish if [such Masses] are easily accessible. The faithful should not have to wonder if they have fulfilled their Sunday obligation.»
In our original reply we clearly stated that organizing the Communion service was incorrect. Although this implies that the Mass should have been canceled and the people informed ahead of time, our reader is correct in pointing out that the point could have been brought out better in the original article.
With respect to his questions, I would say the following:
— The Sunday obligation is to assist at Mass. A Communion service can never fulfill that obligation. In other words, if Mass is possible at another time, one is obliged to go to Mass. If Mass is unavailable, one does well to assist at a Communion service but has no obligation to do so.
— In the concrete case of our original questioner: In good faith he attended what he believed would be a Mass with the intention of fulfilling his obligation, only to find that there was no Mass but a Communion service. If the reason for going to church on Saturday evening was due to some great difficulty in attending Mass on Sunday, then he could consider in good conscience that he had done all that was reasonably possible to fulfill the obligation. If, on the other hand, there was no great inconvenience in attending Mass on Sunday, he would be obliged to do so.
* * *
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.
