A reader writes:
You asked for more Sci-Fi questions to blog about, so I’m happy to be able to help. 🙂
1. Assume that a group of people who can time travel journey back to the Jurassic period. Among their number are some Catholics. Barring any other impediments (rampaging dinosaurs, etc.), are those Catholics still obliged to travel forward in time to attend Mass at some point?
The way the law is written now, the answer would be no.
The current Code of Canon Law (the one binding on the time travellers when they left–unless a new Code comes into existence before then) was promulated on January 25, 1983. Laws do not pertain to things prior to their promulgation unless the law in question expressly provides otherwise:
Can. 9 Laws regard the future, not the past, unless they expressly provide for the past.
The current Code makes no provision for creating a legal obligation to attend Mass prior to its own promulgation, so there isn’t one.
The same goes for the 1917 Code of Canon Law (which previously was in effect). And, in fact, the New Law (a.k.a. the Law of Christ) that was promulgated in the first century did not (so far as we know) contain any provisions on this topic.
Therefore, it would seem to me that if you travel back before the Mass obligation was legally binding that you simply are not bound by it.
There also, in the same manner, is no provision in the Codes of Canon Law requiring you to travel forwards in time to attend Mass.
Of course, it would be a very good thing to do so–assuming that you are reasonably able to do so–but not a legally required thing.
All of this applies to one’s ordinary Sunday obligation. The same would seem to apply, though, to one’s annual obligation to receive Commuion, at least during Easter time. It’s especially hard to enforce that if Easter hasn’t come into existence yet.
This is not to say that there are no religious obligations that would attach to time travellers. Anything that is part of human nature and thus natural law would continue to bind them (e.g., that we must worship the one true God, that we must devote adequate time to rest and worship, that we must not break the Ten Commandments).
So would any particular obligations arising directly from their reception of baptism, confirmation, marriage, and ordination–since these involve the entry into states of life that have obligations that are not temporally specific.
(The general duty to receive the Eucharist arising from baptism might oblige people to return to the future for the Eucharist in a general way, but not at any specific point in time–no pun intended.)
But matters specified by ecclesiastical law would not be specified if one travels to a temporal environment before that law comes into existence–unless it makes provision otherwise (which it doesn’t).
As a proof of this, note that ecclesiastical law does not bind AFTER a law ceases. Once you move FORWARD in time past a law’s existence, it is no longer binding. (This happens entirely naturally as time carries us forward.) In the same way, if you move BACKWARDS past a law’s existence then it also is no longer binding. Thus ecclesiastical laws do not bind BEFORE they are promulgated because they do not exist prior to promulgation.
Can. 7 A law is
established when it is promulgated.
If no ecclesiastical law exists when you happen to be then you are not bound by any ecclesiastical law.
2. If so, should they do so on their own personal timeline’s Sunday, or on Sunday according to the Jurassic’s calendar?
Since there is no binding law on this point, the question is moot.
3. Now imagine that a Catholic priest was among their number. Could he say Mass or offer any of the other Sacraments?
This is an interesting question. It is not clear whether priests who have time travelled to before the Incarnation, Death, and Resurrection of Christ would have the power to perform the sacraments.
We do have some indication that these graces can be operable before the Christ Event (as some theologians call it). For example, from the first moment of her conception Mary received graces that were not usually given until the Christian age began (and, for many, before the end of the history).
Christ also confected the Eucharist before his Death and Resurrection.
But the matter is not 100% certain, and in doubtful cases it is advisable to administer the sacraments conditionally (e.g., "If it is possible to baptize you in this time zone, I baptize you . . . ").
4. If the group also included a bishop, would that change anything?
Yes. They could conditionally set up apostolic succession in the Jurassic and have a Church-before-the-Church–at least conditionally.
They might also be able to conditionally elect a Jurassic pope, though this is also uncertain and would have to be done conditionally.
At that point it would be advisable to send someone Back To The Future to consult with the known Magisterium to ask for rulings on the feasibility of all this.
And they’d need to listen to what the known Magisterium has to say.
We’d hate to have to heal a cross-temporal schism.
(NOTE: All this could change if a liturgical dancer accidentally steps on a butterfly.)
