Non solum: Which Optional Memorials to Observe

The General Instruction of the Roman Missal (excerpted below) speaks of the choice of Mass at nos. 353-355. A reader writes to ask how one decides which optional memorials to observe, or not. What do you think?

I. The Choice of Mass

353. On Solemnities the Priest is obliged to follow the Calendar of the church where he is celebrating.

354. On Sundays, on the weekdays during Advent, Christmas Time, Lent, and Easter Time, on Feasts, and on Obligatory Memorials:
a) If Mass is celebrated with the people, the Priest should follow the Calendar of the church where he is celebrating;
b) If Mass is celebrated with the participation of one minister only, the Priest may choose either the Calendar of the church or his
proper Calendar.

355. On Optional Memorials,
a) On the weekdays of Advent from December 17 to December 24, on days within the Octave of the Nativity of the Lord, and on the weekdays of Lent, except Ash Wednesday and during Holy Week, the Mass texts for the current liturgical day are used; but the Collect may be taken from a Memorial which happens to be inscribed in the General Calendar for that day, except on Ash Wednesday and during Holy Week. On weekdays of Easter Time, Memorials of Saints may rightly be celebrated in full.
b) On weekdays of Advent before December 17, on weekdays of Christmas Time from January 2, and on weekdays of Easter Time, one of the following may be chosen: either the Mass of the weekday, or the Mass of the Saint or of one of the Saints whose Memorial is observed, or the Mass of any Saint inscribed in the Martyrology for that day.
c) On weekdays in Ordinary Time, there may be chosen either the Mass of the weekday, or the Mass of an Optional Memorial which happens to occur on that day, or the Mass of any Saint inscribed in the Martyrology for that day, or a Mass for Various Needs, or a Votive Mass.

If he celebrates with the people, the Priest will take care not to omit too frequently and without sufficient reason the readings assigned each day in the Lectionary to the weekdays, for the Church desires that a richer portion at the table of God’s Word should be spread before the people.

For the same reason he should choose Masses for the Dead in moderation, for every Mass is offered for both the living and the dead, and there is a commemoration of the dead in the Eucharistic Prayer.

Where, however, the Optional Memorials of the Blessed Virgin Mary or of the Saints are dear to the faithful, the legitimate devotion of the latter should be satisfied.

Moreover, as regards the option of choosing between a Memorial inscribed in the General Calendar and one inserted in a diocesan or religious Calendar, preference should be given, all else being equal and in keeping with tradition, to the Memorial in the particular Calendar.

Anthony Ruff, OSB

Fr. Anthony Ruff, OSB, is a monk of St. John's Abbey. He teaches liturgy, liturgical music, and Gregorian chant at St. John's University School of Theology-Seminary. He is widely published and frequently presents across the country on liturgy and music. He is the author of Sacred Music and Liturgical Reform: Treasures and Transformations, and of Responsorial Psalms for Weekday Mass: Advent, Christmas, Lent, Easter. He does priestly ministry at the neighboring community of Benedictine sisters in St. Joseph.

Please leave a reply.

Comments

9 responses to “Non solum: Which Optional Memorials to Observe”

  1. Todd Flowerday

    The community’s or cathedral patron, certainly yes. I would say that ideally, one might observe an optional memorial if a club or society or movement takes the saint as patron. A parish school if one of its nearby schools (an athletic competitor, for example) observes that saint. Other parishes with which priests are shared for Sunday Eucharist or liturgies like Reconciliation. Patrons of high schools of parishioners, perhaps. Other parishes in the deanery. Patron saint of the parish founding pastor. Any statue or room named on the premises. Cardinal Newman for a university community. Am I missing anything?

    Reply
  2. Todd Orbitz

    What I find interesting here is the following:

    “For the same reason he should choose Masses for the Dead in moderation, for every Mass is offered for both the living and the dead, and there is a commemoration of the dead in the Eucharistic Prayer.”

    Functionally, requiem Masses have almost entirely disappeared, and they are not seemingly chosen in moderation at all. Many assume that they have been forbidden.

    Now, I would be the very first one to agree that daily black vestments were NOT a healthy liturgical expression, but now it is virtually impossible to even get a single requiem offered in a Parish that may have more then enough Priests – (unless, of course it is offered in the presence of the body – which is not what this rubric is indicating). (e.g. My own Parish – where we have three daily masses – 4 in residence Priests, 1 foreign visiting Priest – and 2 retired Priests who often assist.)

    Reply
  3. Aaron Sanders

    Considering that these may be observed solely through the use of the saint’s (proper or common) collect, I hardly see why not to observe an optional memorial. If these memorials were leading to undue repetition of the same common readings (as would have been a respectable complaint under the old calendar/rubrics) I would see more need to pick and choose. As things are, they cause nothing to be lost (the Missal itself views Ordinary Time orations as wholly interchangeable on weekdays for the sake of variety) while gaining at least a passing nod to one of our heavenly patrons and praise of God’s gracious work within the same. Seems like a surefire win to me.

    Reply
    1. Anthony Ruff, OSB Avatar
      Anthony Ruff, OSB

      @Aaron Sanders – comment #3:
      I see your point, Aaron – but it makes me wonder what the reformers had in mind. Why didn’t they make all the optional memorials obligatory? And on days with more than one, why didn’t they say that any of them may (but one of them must) be chosen? They must have been made optional for a reason.
      awr

      Reply
      1. Fr. Ron Krisman

        @Anthony Ruff, OSB – comment #4:
        Is there a genuine cult of a saint whose memorial is optional? That should be a guiding principle.

        Even for American saints I think that question should be asked. St. Elizabeth Ann Seton’s memorial is obligatory, while St. Rose Philippine Duchesne’s is optional. Who on the East Coast of the US has a cult to St. Rose? I remember the meeting of the USCCB when her memorial was approved for inclusion in the particular calendar of this country. Several East coast bishops did not even know how her surname was pronounced! I’m glad the memorial is optional. Let Catholics in Missouri and Kansas celebrate her memory. If her cult becomes more widespread, that would be the time for her memorial to be raised to an obligatory one.

  4. Jordan Zarembo

    The “stacking” of collects and the postcommunion should be permitted again on days (such as in Ordinary Time) where there is more discretion for commemorations. An elderly priest at a local church, when celebrating the Ordinary Form, would often say the collect of the day and the collect of the commemorated saint (per EF practice). I did not find this practice distracting or a detraction from noble simplicity.

    Certainly, if there are more than two possible collects to be said, a “pick two” policy would be wise. These occasions are not that common, however.

    Reply
  5. Matthew Hazell

    @Anthony Ruff (#4): What Bugnini writes in his memoir of the reform regarding this is interesting. In 1968, the CDF made some observations on the schema of Coetus I (the calendar group). According to Bugnini, this is what they said:

    Optional memorials should be reduced to a minimum, because they lend themselves to use as “a convenient system for leveling down,” that is, for celebrating the ferial Mass and neglecting the cult of the saints. (Bugnini, The Reform of the Liturgy 1948-1975 [Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1990], p. 311)

    Bugnini makes a comment on this request of the Congregation in a footnote:

    The principle of the optional memorial proved, on the contrary, to be effective and acceptable. It made possible to increase the number of saints in the calendar and the number of requests for inclusion that are made to the Church. It also gave places and individuals ample room for choice. (Bugnini, Reform, p. 311 n. 17)

    If my experience in the UK is anything to go by, I would have said Bugnini was rather optimistic, and the CDF has been proven right. Optional memorials are very rarely celebrated, and the easy option of repeating the Sunday propers is widespread. My own opinion is that there is just too much choice with regards to Mass propers on green ferial days and optional memorials, so analysis paralysis sets in, and priests default to the Sunday texts.

    This frequent recourse is further encouraged by the (rather contradictory) advice in the General Introduction to the Lectionary: it asks the priest to “make sure not to omit too often or needlessly the readings assigned for each day in the weekday Lectionary” (n. 83), even on obligatory memorials. So, on the one hand, there is a huge choice of Mass propers; on the other hand, one is strongly encouraged stick to the weekday lections. Is it any wonder priests go for the ‘easy’ options?

    Reply
  6. Philip Spaeth

    It was interesting to me to read this post today, as, in our diocese, many parishes (with the permission and encouragement of our Bishop) will be replacing the 29th Sunday of Ordinary Time this weekend with the Memorial of the North American Martyrs (Jogues, Brébeuf, et al.). This seems to me to be rather a good decision here, as these Jesuit missionaries were martyred within our diocese and have become a great source of devotion for many of us. In a very real sense, the Jesuit martyrs have become patrons for our entire diocese, and so, to me, it is a no-brainer that this Memorial is always celebrated here. I also do not think it goes too far to replace an Ordinary Time Sunday for this purpose. In order to make it a full Sunday Mass, the First Reading and Psalm are being taken from the Common of Martyrs, with the Second Reading and Gospel being from the Memorial itself. The Propers being used are those from the Common for Several Missionary Martyrs.

    It is obvious that there was a fair bit of consultation about this at the diocesan level, so perhaps that can be something of a model for parishes, too. Perhaps priests could meet with parish liturgy committees or regular daily mass folks and plan out what memorials to celebrate in the particular community over a period of, say, a couple months or so. It may help parishes get a sense of what is important to parishioners in terms of devotion, etc. It may also become an unwieldy undertaking that opens up an unsightly can of worms, but it’s an idea!

    Reply
  7. Todd Flowerday

    Remember that in MR3, four Masses from those described as for “various needs and occasions” may be substituted for an Ordinary Sunday: for the pope or bishop (especially on an ordination anniversary), Christian Unity, and evangelization. That last one, I think, could be more widely applied not only in our current situation of need, but whenever a missionary comes to preach at parish Masses.

    Reply

Posted

in

,

by

Anthony Ruff, OSB

Tags:

, ,

Discover more from Home

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading