Various Commentary on Canon Law

Code of Canon Law Annotated: Commentary from Wilson & Lafleur Limitée Montréal, 1993

Can. 902 “Unless the welfare of the Christian faithful requires or suggests otherwise, priests can concelebrate the Eucharist. They are completely free to celebrate the Eucharist individually, however, but not while a concelebration is taking place in the same church or oratory.”

The “unity of sacrifice and of the priesthood” is duly made manifest in the concelebration of the Eucharist, which at the same time “expresses and confirms the fraternal ties between priests” (S. Congr. for Rites, Instr. Eucharisticum mysterium 47, 25-05-1967, AAS 59 (1967) 565-566; CLD 6 (1963-1967) 542). There are two situations which must be considered in relation to this canon:

1)  The priest as priest may concelebrate (for the reasons given above), although the freedom of each priest to celebrate Mass individually remains intact, provided that it does not coincide either in time or place with a concelebration. This freedom must even be fostered by all kinds of facilities (cf. S. Congr. For Divine Worship, Decl. In celebratione Missæ 3, 07-08-1972, AAS 64 [1972] 563; CLD 7 [1968-1972] 614), so that the personal devotion of the priest might thus be nourished with which constitutes “the heart of the priestly life” (Document Ultimis temporibus of the Synod of bishops of 1971, 30-11-1971, pars altera 41, AAS 63 [1971] 914, CLD 7 [1968-1972] 357: this is the text In celebratione Missæ refers to as a basis for the norm found in c. 902, §2).

2)  The priest as a minister to whom the care of souls is entrusted: his raison d’être and primary obligation is the service to the faithful. The benefit of the faithful will always be the prevailing criterion. Though “when the faithful take an active part [in the concelebration], the unity of the people of God is strikingly manifested” (S. Congr. for Rites, Instr. Eucharisticum mysterium 47, 25-05-1967, AAS 59 [1967]565; CLD 6 [1963-1967] 542), nevertheless the necessity or convenience of providing them with the possibility of participating at Mass in different laces and at different times, or of giving them other pastoral services, may render individual celebration necessary. The scarcity of priests is the reason for c. 905, § 2, by virtue of which the Ordinary may authorize the same priest to celebrate two Masses of feast days and three on Sundays or holydays of obligation. In view of its special nature, bination or trination would not usually be compatible with a concelebration in the same church or in nearby places.

In any case, it must be borne in mind that: a) the deeper reason for concelebration is that already explained, but not the apparent greater solemnity that might be externally expressed in it; b) care must be taken to ensure that it is performed “with dignity and true piety.” To this end, and in order to obtain the greatest spiritual benefit, the freedom of the concelebrants must always be guaranteed and their internal and external participation encouraged by means of the complete and genuine celebration of the Eucharist according to the norms of the Institutio generalis Missalis romani: by conducting all the parts of the Mass according to their nature; by respecting the distinction of offices and ministries, and by bearing in mind the importance of the chants and the moments of sacred silence. This is the particular concern of the bishop or the competent superior (S. Congr. for Divine Worship, Decl. In celebratione Missæ 3a, 07-08-1972, AAS 64 [1972] 562; CLD 7 [1968-1972] 613-614).

——————————

New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law. An Entirely New and Comphrehensive Commentary by Canonists from North America and Europe, with a Revised English Translation of the Code. Commissioned by The Canon Law Soceity of America. Edited by John P. Beal, James A. Coriden, and Thomas J. Green (2000)

Canon 902 — “Unless the welfare of the Christian faithful requires or suggests otherwise, priests can concelebrate the Eucharist . They are completely free to concelebrate the Eucharist individually, however, but not while a concelebration is taking place in the same church or oratory.”

Various forms of concelebration have existed in the Western and Eastern churches since at least the third century. Even before the liturgical reforms decreed by Vatican II, the Roman Pontifical had prescribed concelebration at Masses for the ordination of priests and the consecration of bishops. Sacrosanctum Concilium derogated from canon 803 of the 1917 code to permit much wider opportunity for concelebration. (13) It also directed that a new rite for concelebration be prepared and this was accomplished by 1965. (14) The liturgical laws governing concelebration are found principally in the General Instruction of the Roman Missal 153-208. (15) Concelebration is required at the ordinations of bishops and presbyters and at the Chrism Mass. The liturgical law recommends concelebration, unless the needs of the faithful require otherwise, at: (a) the evening Mass of Holy Thursday; (b) the Mass for councils, meetings of bishops, or synods; (c) the Mass for the blessing of an abbot; (d) the conventual Mass and the principal Mass in churches and oratories; (e) the Mass for any kind of gathering of priests, either secular or religious. The diocesan bishop, in accord with the law, has the right to regulate concelebration in his diocese, also in the churches and oratories of clerical religious institutes and clerical societies of apostolic life when the eucharistic celebration is open to the faithful. (16)

The first part of the canon is based substantially on a statement from Eucharisticum mysterium 47. Concelebration is preferred over multiple private Masses because it manifests the Church gathered “in the unity of sacrifice and priesthood and the single offering of thanks around the one altar with the ministers and holy people.” (17) However priests should not insist on concelebration at the expense of the welfare of the faithful, such as when more than one Mass is required to meet pastoral needs.

The second part of the canon is based on Sacrosanctum Concilium 57, §2, n. 2 which says that each priest should have the opportunity (facultas) to celebrate an individual Mass. The canon affirms this by saying that priests are completely free to celebrate the Eucharist individually. This does not apply to Holy Thursday, however, when liturgical law prohibits all Masses without a congregation. Furthermore, priests are forbidden from celebrating an individual Mass at the time when there is a concelebration occurring in the same place, and they are also subject to the law of canon 906 on celebrating with at least some faithful present.

Concelebration among priests of different Catholic churches sui iuris can be done with permission of the diocesan/eparchial bishop for a just cause, especially that of fostering charity, and for the sake of manifesting unity between the churches. (18) The liturgical rite of the principal celebrant is to be observed, and he is to wear the appropriate vestments and insignia of his own church sui iuris (CCEO 701). Ordinarily the concelebrants wear the vestments of their own church.

Notes:

(13) SC 57. 

(14) SC 58; Ritus seryandus in concelebratione Missae el Ritus Communionis sub utraque specie (Rome, Typis Polyglottis Vaticanis, 1965); P. Jounel, The Rite of Con celebration of Mass and of Communion under Both Species (New York: Desclée, 1967). Hereafter cited as either Rite of Concelebration or Rite of Communion under Both Kinds.

(15) See also NCCB, Guidelines for the Concelebration of the Eucharist, rev. ed., September 23, 1987, BCLN 23  (1987) 83-87

(16) See CC 678, §1; 1214; 1223.

(17) SCRit, decr Ecclesiae semper, March 7, 1965, AAS 57 (1965) 410, DOL 1792. See also GIRM 59; and CDW, decl In celebratione Missae August 7, 1972, AAS 60 (1972) 561-562. DOL 208.

(18) One Opinion holds that the bishop’s permission is necessary only in the case of a publicly announced celebration. See Pospishil Com, 299.

——————————

A commentary on the new Code of the canon law (all volumes) by Dom Charles Augustine Bachofen, O.S.B., D.D., Publication date 1918.

Can. 803 “Non licet pluribus sacerdotibus concelebrare, praeterquam in Missa ordinationis presbyterorum et in Missa consecrationis Episcoporum secundum Pontificale Romanum.” [“It is not licit that several priests concelebrate, beyond the Mass of ordination of priests and in the Mass of consecration of Bishops according to the Roman Pontifical.”]

Concelebrating takes place if two or more priests consecrate the same bread and wine or, as at the consecration of bishops, two hosts and the same wine in one chalice. It is, therefore, not a mere recital of the same prayers in general, and of the formula of consecration in particular, but a distinct rite, (5) which was once common in both East and West and is still in vogue in the Orient in cities where there is but one church. All the priests gather around the bishop, with whom they recite the prayers of the Mass and receive the Holy Eucharist under both species. (6) In the Latin Church concelebration is allowed and prescribed only at the ordination of priests and the consecration of bishops according to the Roman Pontifical. (7) Under Innocent III (1198-1216) concelebration was customary on higher feasts, but now it is forbidden in the Latin Church (this canon does not concern the Oriental Rite) (8) except on the two occasions mentioned.

Benedict XIV gives some practical hints for newly ordained priests how to concelebrate with the bishop. He says that the Roman Pontifical prescribes that the bishop should recite the words of consecration “slowly and in a rather loud voice” so that the neomysts may follow, and adds that the latter should have the intention of consecrating the same bread and wine together with the bishop. This is sufficient, and they need not worry about the difficulties proposed by some authors. Those difficulties are absurd because the bishop is the main consecrator and the priests merely concur in the act as accessories; the form they employ is morally one with the form pronounced by the bishop, and consequently, even though they finish the words of consecration a little before or after the bishop, the consecration is valid. (9) The same Pontiff, who was a great canonist, also says that there is no reason for depriving a priest thus celebrating with his bishop of the right of accepting a stipend. (10)

Notes:

(5) Benedict XIV, De Sacrificio Missae, I. Ill, c. 16. n. 5.

(6) Ibid., n. 1: Cath. Encycl., Vol. IV, 190, s. v, “Concelebration.”

(7) Tit. De Ordinibus Conferendis; tit. De Ordinatione Presbyteri; tit. De Consecratione Electi in Episcopum.

(8) Benedict XIV, “Allatat sunt,” July 26, 1755, § 38.

(9) De Sacrificio Missae, I. III. c. 16, n. 7.

(10) Ibid., n. 10.