Ask a Question - or - Return to the Faith and Spirituality Forum Index

Question Title	Posted By	Question Date
Mass Intentions & Sponsors	Walter	Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Question: Dear Brother – I hope you don’t mind me asking again but I would like perhaps more clarification on the matter of “Norms regarding Mass Intentions” Nov 30, 2009. On the Decree on Mass Stipends, On Art 1, Par 2, is the word “transgress” in this case to be taken lightly or not? And what is meant by “relative” moral responsibility? I understand that what I asked IS possible, however, should this become the norm where the priest can set a rule that any mass can have 1 or 2 (but no more) personal intentions? Or is something that to be done only on rare occasions? I guess what bothers me is this: it seems like many priests take some canon laws very lightly and decide to start making exceptions and see how far and how often they can get away with it. I know for a fact that many priests willfully disregard Canon law 874 regarding the Sacrament of Baptism par 1, 3/4 and have accepted as sponsors persons who were non-Catholic because “well, the parents had already picked the god-parents” or accepted sponsors who were married civilly because they were coming from out of town and he just wanted to make sure that the child was baptized. I recently talked with a couple who were trying to become sponsors and were shopping around and were told by several churches that they were not qualified to be sponsors because they were married only civilly and their reply was that they recently became sponsors in California and the priest during the baptismal rite brought up the fact they he knew they were not married in the Church but wanted to know if this couple would be firm in making sure the child was brought up in the Catholic Church. So this couple could not understand why they were being denied becoming sponsors over such a “minor” matter. Thank you and sorry for being a pest.
Question Answered by Bro. Ignatius Mary, OLSM Dear Walter: Well, you have two topics here. I prefer only one topic per post. One can have more than one question on the same topic, but only one topic per post. That way it is easier for people to find a Q&A on the topic they are looking for. Thus, I changed the subject line to refer to both topics. On the Mass Intentions: From what I can gather, the issue is a matter of the parishioners agreeing to sharing a Mass for their respective intentions. As long as that consent it given I see no other restriction. This, I imagine, is very rare as most of the time two separate people may not even be aware of each other's Mass intention request. But, a couple of friends go go in together, or if a person really wants a certain date, maybe the priest can give them the name of the person who has already reserved that date to seek their consent. But, consent from the people must be secured. The priest just can't go ahead and do it. The "transgress" and "relative moral responsibility" refers to a priest who accepts more than one Mass Intention for the same Mass without getting consent from all parties. "Relative moral responsibility" I believe refers to the relative nature of the priest's actions -- whether or not he did this by accident, forgetfulness, a misplaced pastoral reason, or to exploit Mass stipends. That last one would be grave sin, I believe. On Baptism sponsors not married in the Church: Any priest who allows a couple who is living in sin (by not being married in the Church) is breaking Church law and sinning himself. He should be reported to the Bishop. For this couple you mention, tell them this is not a minor matter. To begin with they are living in sin. They are not married in the eyes of God. Thus, they are risking their souls to hell unless they regularize their marriage properly. Second, a Godparent (sponsor) is to be model of Catholicism to the child, help the parents whenever needed to raise the child as a good Catholic. How can this couple do that when they cannot participate in the Sacraments because of their grave sin. What kind a model are they to the children by living in fornication or adultery as the case may be? If they think this is minor then they are not qualified, in my opinion, to be sponsors even if their marriage was proper due to their attitude toward the faith This is hardly minor. God Bless, Bro. Ignatius Mary Footer Notes: This forum is for general questions on the faith. See specific Topic Forums below: Spiritual Warfare, demons, the occult go to our Spiritul Warfare Q&S Forum. Liturgy Questions go to our Liturgy and Liturgical Law Q&A Forum Liturgy of the Hours (Divine Office) Questions go to our Divine Office Q&A Forum Defenfing the Faith Questions go to our Defending the Faith Q&A Forum Church History Questions go to our Church History Q&A Forum

Question Title

Posted By

Question Date

Mass Intentions & Sponsors

Walter

Wednesday, December 2, 2009

Question:

Dear Brother – I hope you don’t mind me asking again but I would like perhaps more clarification on the matter of “Norms regarding Mass Intentions” Nov 30, 2009.
On the Decree on Mass Stipends, On Art 1, Par 2, is the word “transgress” in this case to be taken lightly or not?

And what is meant by “relative” moral responsibility?

I understand that what I asked IS possible, however, should this become the norm where the priest can set a rule that any mass can have 1 or 2 (but no more) personal intentions? Or is something that to be done only on rare occasions?

I guess what bothers me is this: it seems like many priests take some canon laws very lightly and decide to start making exceptions and see how far and how often they can get away with it. I know for a fact that many priests willfully disregard Canon law 874 regarding the Sacrament of Baptism par 1, 3/4 and have accepted as sponsors persons who were non-Catholic because “well, the parents had already picked the god-parents” or accepted sponsors who were married civilly because they were coming from out of town and he just wanted to make sure that the child was baptized.

I recently talked with a couple who were trying to become sponsors and were shopping around and were told by several churches that they were not qualified to be sponsors because they were married only civilly and their reply was that they recently became sponsors in California and the priest during the baptismal rite brought up the fact they he knew they were not married in the Church but wanted to know if this couple would be firm in making sure the child was brought up in the Catholic Church. So this couple could not understand why they were being denied becoming sponsors over such a “minor” matter.

Thank you and sorry for being a pest.

Question Answered by Bro. Ignatius Mary, OLSM

Dear Walter:

Well, you have two topics here. I prefer only one topic per post. One can have more than one question on the same topic, but only one topic per post. That way it is easier for people to find a Q&A on the topic they are looking for. Thus, I changed the subject line to refer to both topics.

On the Mass Intentions: From what I can gather, the issue is a matter of the parishioners agreeing to sharing a Mass for their respective intentions. As long as that consent it given I see no other restriction. This, I imagine, is very rare as most of the time two separate people may not even be aware of each other's Mass intention request. But, a couple of friends go go in together, or if a person really wants a certain date, maybe the priest can give them the name of the person who has already reserved that date to seek their consent. But, consent from the people must be secured. The priest just can't go ahead and do it.

The "transgress" and "relative moral responsibility" refers to a priest who accepts more than one Mass Intention for the same Mass without getting consent from all parties. "Relative moral responsibility" I believe refers to the relative nature of the priest's actions -- whether or not he did this by accident, forgetfulness, a misplaced pastoral reason, or to exploit Mass stipends. That last one would be grave sin, I believe.

On Baptism sponsors not married in the Church: Any priest who allows a couple who is living in sin (by not being married in the Church) is breaking Church law and sinning himself. He should be reported to the Bishop.

For this couple you mention, tell them this is not a minor matter. To begin with they are living in sin. They are not married in the eyes of God. Thus, they are risking their souls to hell unless they regularize their marriage properly.

Second, a Godparent (sponsor) is to be model of Catholicism to the child, help the parents whenever needed to raise the child as a good Catholic. How can this couple do that when they cannot participate in the Sacraments because of their grave sin. What kind a model are they to the children by living in fornication or adultery as the case may be?

If they think this is minor then they are not qualified, in my opinion, to be sponsors even if their marriage was proper due to their attitude toward the faith

This is hardly minor.

God Bless,
Bro. Ignatius Mary

Footer Notes: This forum is for general questions on the faith. See specific Topic Forums below:
Spiritual Warfare, demons, the occult go to our Spiritul Warfare Q&S Forum.
Liturgy Questions go to our Liturgy and Liturgical Law Q&A Forum
Liturgy of the Hours (Divine Office) Questions go to our Divine Office Q&A Forum
Defenfing the Faith Questions go to our Defending the Faith Q&A Forum
Church History Questions go to our Church History Q&A Forum