During the pandemic, Catholic Church authorities were forced to endorse the state’s ban on Mass attendance. Some hoped this would be the end of the Sunday Obligation, but Sydney’s Archbishop Anthony Fisher reimposed it last week.
When I was growing up, practising Catholics were very aware of the requirement to attend Mass on Sundays and certain feast days that were designated ‘Holy Days of Obligation’.
In a society that was still to some extent sectarian, it did not seem fair that we Catholics were compelled to go to church while Protestants were free to choose. But the Sunday Obligation was a loathsome marker of Catholic identity that you did not question.
I hated having to go to Mass and would often go by myself to an early mass, to get it over with, so that I could enjoy the rest of my Sunday.
To be fair, Sunday mass had some positives. These included its music and theatre, and the engaging craft of some of the priests. But for me, all of this was negated by the Obligation.
When I reached adulthood and developed a broader and quite significant appreciation of certain aspects of the Catholic faith, I grew out of my cultural need to honour the Sunday Obligation.
Indeed, on Sunday mornings to this day, I experience a mild sense of euphoria in being free from its yoke. I would even suggest this signifies that I suffered from a form of PTSD associated with the Obligation.
During the pandemic, the Sunday Obligation has of course suffered something of a blow, with church authorities having to endorse the state’s ban on mass attendance.
I’d hoped that this might have had a lasting effect post-pandemic, with Catholics taking responsibility for deciding on their mass attendance in general, in the way that all citizens are now taking decisions about how to act appropriately in social gatherings.
But last week, Sydney’s Archbishop Anthony Fisher put paid to this in his pastoral letter ‘Come Home to Mass!’ He said:
‘I rescind my decree of 20 March 2020 dispensing the faithful of Sydney from the obligation to attend Mass on Sundays and the Holy Days of Christmas and the Assumption. Under canon 1247 attendance at Mass on those days is now obligatory once again.’
Leaving the Sunday Obligation in its state of being cast aside might have usefully helped Catholic church leaders demonstrate humility in the wake of the sexual abuse crisis.
The need for this arises from the Royal Commission finding that power dynamics in institutional cultures allowed sexual abuse to flourish. But Archbishop Fisher’s pastoral letter – and a similar one from the Archbishop of Hobart – has shown that they are determined to exercise a powerful grip on the lives of the faithful.
The good news is that they are fighting a losing battle, with an increasing 88 per cent majority of Catholics rejecting the Sunday Obligation.
Michael Mullins is a former editor of Eureka Street. He now blogs at http://mullins.id.au
Comments
6 responses to “The Sunday Obligation resumes for fewer Catholics”
Micheal,
Your essay on the restoration of “the Obligation” was cause for me to revisit my reflection on “Why I remain a Catholic” written for P&I some time ago. In my youth during the pre Vatican II era, it was a “Mortal Sin”, requiring Confession in order to receive Holy Communion, to deliberately miss Sunday Mass .There was no Saturday evening option then.People living in the bush often traveled for hours in order to attend the one Mass in the local church. At Primary School as a boarder, at one time we were required to attend the 7 am AND the 9.30 am Mass each second Sunday! They each lasted about 35 minutes – the young celebrant was fast! Monsignor Cahill, the elderly parish priest on the other hand, said the alternate Sunday Mass which lasted an incredible hour and a half or longer if he went too long in his Sermon. Mass was said in Latin, incomprehensible to us , making it a boring experience . English came in when I was in ‘Second Form’ ( Year 7).
The message that the Bishops just don’t get it is painfully clear. Without “bums on seats”and no “collections’ being taken up during Mass, the Parish has to depend solely on “electronic donations” or putting coins in a “Collection Box” in the foyer.
John,
I suspect it is the ‘financial drought’ which prompted some Bishops to take this ill advised step. I agree that it is totally irresponsible for them to reimpose the “Obligation” in the absence of a vaccine and now the current outbreak in Sydney.
When I checked diocesan websites early Tuesday 15 December, only one of Anthony Fisher’s suffragans (Bishop Kennedy in Armidale) had also lifted his March suspension of the Obligation.
It was then laughable to see Bishop Randazzo, on the same day, reimpose the Obligation for Broken Bay Diocese just in time for a predictable Northern Beaches outbreak. Within 4 days, his Northern Beaches parishes were in lockdown.
In the absence of immunisations, it is irresponsible for bishops to restore the Obligation. They appear to care more about the health of their Christmas collections than the health of the faithful.
Ah, Michael. You have to appreciate that the Sunday obligation reinstatement is all about Anthony. And Julian down in Tassie too. It’s not all about us and in fact is of no interest to us. It’s all about Anthony and Julian and their mates needing to feel relevant, desperately trying to make themselves feel relevant. I mean, how on earth would they be able to carry on with all their nonsense if they realised that they’d become, made themselves, totally, irretrievably, mournfully irrelevant? If they realised that they can carry on as much as they like about Sunday obligations and who’s entitled to receive communion and who’s allowed to become a priest but no one is listening any more. No one cares what they think or say. They have made themselves totally irrelevant to us, our faith and our lives. That’s why good active believing Catholics like you and I voted in support of same sex marriage at a higher rate than the general Australian population. That’s why we participate in mass or not without the least regard to what they say. Michael, they’re irrelevant!
Bit quick of the mark, he may have to swallow his pride and rescind his decision.
Is this the same hierarchy that tells us to be kind to little children while it has been abusing them and, more importantly, covering it up? Are their edicts to be given an atom of attention other than to draw attention again to their failings? Are they even up today given the disturbing news coming from the northern beaches of Sydney today?
God knows how you cope with anything in the secular world!