In 2005, Saint Patrick's Day will occur during Lent, as it will fall on Thursday, March 17. Today, my parish priest told the congregation that they can feel free to go ahead and indulge in whatever they gave up for Lent during celebrations on that day. Incidentally, the same priest has said this several times during the past five years.

Well, my gut reaction tells me that it would be wrong to deviate from my usual Lenten plan on that day. But I was curious if any other Catholics in Message Board Land have gotten advice like this from a priest at their parish and whether they think it's right or wrong.

-- Patience (nospam@idelete.it), March 14, 2005

Answers

Please bump for responses! Thanks.

-- Patience (nospam@idelete.it), March 14, 2005.

If St. Patrick is the, or one of the principle patrons of your community, parish, diocese, or country, then the day is a major feast day. We never fast during a feast. This is true for every Sunday - the Resurrection of the Lord. St. Joseph falls during Lent as well, we do not fast.

Please, nobody bring up the usual date of the Annunciation being on Good Friday...there is an obvious huge difference.

-- Fr. Paul (pjdoucet@hotmail.com), March 14, 2005.

It is customary for the Church to grant a dispensation from penitential practices on Sundays and "Solemnities" during Lent. Solemnities are the highest-ranking celebrations (one rank higher than "Feasts") on the new (1969) liturgical calendar of the Latin Church.

This includes the Solemnity of St. Joseph, the date of which (March 19) always occurs before Good Friday ... the Solemnity of the Annunciation, the normal date of which (March 25) usually occurs during Lent, ... and "Proper Solemnities," which may occur during Lent.

"Proper [i.e., not universally celebrated] Solemnities," which can be established by an ecclesiastical authority (e.g., a bishop) include ...
solemnities of a principal patron of a place (a city or nation),
solemnities of the dedication of a particular church (and the anniversary of the dedication), and
solemnities of a religious order's/congregation's title, founder, or principal patron.
This is how, in some places, March 17 (which is normally just a day for a "commemoration" of St. Patrick), can become a "Proper Solemnity of St. Patrick."

Where March 17 does not fall on a Sunday and is not a Proper Solemnity, people should continue to observe penitential practices -- and this would include abstinence from meat when March 17 falls on a Friday.

MORE BELOW

-- (Ides@f.March), March 14, 2005.

Some special situations:
If March 19 falls on a Sunday during Lent (even Palm Sunday), the Solemnity of St. Joseph is celebrated on Saturday, March 18.
If March 19 falls on Monday to Wednesday of Holy Week, the Solemnity of St. Joseph can be celebrated on that day or can be shifted (by a bishops' conference) to a day during the Easter season. In 2008, in most of the Church (including the U.S.), March 19 will be a Solemnity (with white vestments) exactly one day before Holy Thursday.
It is as yet unclear what will happen in the year 2285 (if the end of the world has not yet come). In that year, for the first time since 1818, March 19 will fall on Holy Thursday. Most likely, the Church will celebrate the Solemnity of St. Joseph on a different date in 2285.
If March 25 falls on a Sunday of Lent before Palm Sunday, the Solemnity of the Annunciation is celebrated on Satuday, March 24.
If March 25 falls during Holy Week (including Palm Sunday) -- as it does in 2005 -- the Solemnity of the Annunciation is celebrated on Monday of the Second Week of Easter. It is not celebrated during Easter Week, because that whole "Octave of Easter" is of an even higher "rank" than a Solemnity.

In the Latin Catholicism, Easter always falls between March 22 and April 25, inclusive. The last time it fell on March 22 was 1818, and the next time will be 2285. The last time it fell on April 25 was 1943, and the next time will be 2038.

-- (Ides@f.March), March 14, 2005.

Ides,

Do some simple Mass, Sundays are never counted as the 40 days of Lenten Penance.

-- Fr. Paul (pjdoucet@hotmail.com), March 14, 2005.

Simple MATH not "Mass". Sorry.

-- Fr. Paul (pjdoucet@hotmail.com), March 14, 2005.

Father Paul,

Please swallow the pride and admit you are WRONG.

-- Toby (Toby123321@yahoo.com), March 14, 2005.

"Father Paul, Please swallow the pride and admit you are WRONG."

About what?

-- Fr. Paul (pjdoucet@hotmail.com), March 14, 2005.

There is a problem: "Lent runs from Ash Wednesday to the Mass of the Lord's Supper exclusive." (General Norms for the Liturgical Year and the Calendar, # 28.) Either way it doesn't add up to 40.

-- Fr. Paul (pjdoucet@hotmail.com), March 14, 2005.

Reverend, three things ~~~~~>

We didn't say anything that should have evoked the remark you made to us.

We already knew that Lent is not exactly 40 days, whether you count the Sundays or not. Sorry to know that you are just finding out.

Thanks for pointing out that you found the research I did to be helpful and interesting. It is good to know that you appreciated the half hour of work I did on that.

(Hi, TobY.)

-- (Ides@f.March), March 15, 2005.

Who is "we" and "us"?

I was always told that Lent was 40 days excluding Sundays. Had no reason to doubt it and never thought to check the OFFICIAL definition of Lent (Ash Wednesday to Mass of Lord's Supper). In the past I simply did the math and it worked out (because I was erroneously including days I should not have). They do not teach us absolutely everything in seminary, nor could they (or even come close). And unless a question arises on something there is no call to look into it as there are enough things already to look into.

Your first post mentioned the dispensation for Sundays, thus my above response. I admit, I sometimes spit fire (spend too much time debating so called Traditional Catholics) and get confused as to who I am talking to. It's not intentional, just the fault of being too quick and brief.

Mia culpa. But, your sarcasm won't win you any points ("Thanks for pointing out that you found the research I did to be helpful and interesting. It is good to know that you appreciated the half hour of work I did on that.").

Patience, as the original question was his/hers should be the one to thank you, not me; there was nothing in your research that interests me in the sense that it was something I didn't know. The stuff about the years 1818 and 2285 didn't grab my attention, but if you would like I will say "Neato!!!" ;) All you did really was repeat my initial response to Patience, but did so with many more words and facts. Was it needed? Not by me, maybe not by Patience. I am sure though that somebody out there in cyber land appreciates your work, so don't fret.

-- Fr. Paul (pjdoucet@hotmail.com), March 15, 2005.

Ides, I for one was fascinated by your work. But I disagree with Toby’s claim that Fr Paul said something “wrong”.

Re the 40 days, I was taught that in the old calendar Holy Week was not considered part of Lent, which ran from Ash Wednesday to Palm Sunday, i.e. 40 days according to the “inclusive” Roman method of counting days. (cf Christ spent “three days” in the tomb from Friday to Sunday.)

-- Steve (55555@aol.com), March 15, 2005.