Vatican fixes "Monday Holy Day" mess

Cardinal Roche injects some common sense into US liturgical calendar

Back in October, I wrote about the monkey wrench thrown by Bishop Thomas Paprocki of Springfield, Illinois, into the liturgical calendar for the US Catholic Church.

For some reason known only to him, Paprocki took issue with the USCCB’s longstanding practice of waiving the obligation to attend Mass when December 8 falls on a Sunday and the Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception is transferred to the following Monday. Several outlets at the time reported that he (serving as chair of the bishops’ committee on canonical affairs) insisted that the USCCB’s Divine Worship committee designate Monday, December 9, 2024, as a holy day of obligation. They apparently weren't having it.

It seems that afterwards, when he didn’t get his way, he then wrote a dubium to the Vatican’s Dicastery for Legislative Texts (DLT). His question, (of course) did not provide key context, such as the fact that the obligation is dispensed in the US when certain holy days fall on Saturday or Monday, or that the longstanding practice in the US was to dispense the faithful when the Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception is transferred to December 9.

The dicastery responded with a letter that affirmed Paprocki’s position. Never mind that the US liturgical calendar for the year had long been published. Diocesan websites had long listed the dispensation as well, just as they had in 2013 and 2019 (the two previous years when December 8 fell on a Sunday).

This led to a bit of chaos. Many bishops dispensed their dioceses by invoking Canon 87 from the Church’s Code of Canon law (ironically the same canon Paprocki attempted to use in order to dispense his diocese from complying with Traditionis Custodes). Other bishops upheld the obligation, although at least two (Archbishop Cordileone in San Francisco and Bishop Burbidge in Arlington) dispensed Catholics who attended a Latin Mass on December 8. (Because heaven forbid a traditionalist be obligated to attend even one Novus Ordo Mass!)

Personally speaking, I attended Mass on December 9, even though I was not obliged. I took advantage of Cardinal Gregory’s “Holy Day of Opportunity” and prayed for my mother on the 5th anniversary of her death (which was also on Monday, December 9).

Cardinal Roche puts an end to the confusion

On January 23, 2025, Cardinal Arthur Roche — Prefect of the Vatican’s Dicastery for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments (DDW) — issued a letter that appears to settle the matter.

Essentially, Cardinal Roche states that Paprocki’s question is not covered in the Code of Canon Law, and that the DDW is the competent curial body for such interventions. He points to the “well-established practice according to which, in the event of the transfer of a holyday of obligation, the obligation to attend Mass is not transferred.”

Key passages:

6. Since this is a liturgical matter and since this issue is not expressly regulated by the CIC, in addition to applying what is laid down in the Normae universales de Anno liturgico et de Calendario, it is necessary to bear in mind the normative interventions that the competent curial body for divine worship and the discipline of the sacraments has adopted over time. These interventions attest to a well-established practice according to which, in the event of the transfer of a holyday of obligation, the obligation to attend Mass is not transferred.

7. Since this practice is not contrary to the canons of the CIC, it is to be considered liturgical law (cf. Canon 2) that in the event of the occasional transfer of a holyday of obligation, the obligation to attend Mass is not transferred to the day ad quem.

Hopefully this ends a strange chapter in which the bishop of a small diocese attempted to impose an extremely pedantic law on the entire US Church.

Here’s the full letter: