Bishop Tod Brown & Summorum Pontificum, Part 2

Below is the text of the message Bishop Tod Brown, of the Diocese of Orange, California, sent to the priests in his diocese regarding the implementation of Summorum Pontificum in the Diocese of Orange under his administration:

DIOCESE OF ORANGE OFFICE OF THE BISHOP MEMORANDUM

To: The Presbyterate of Orange
From: Most Reverend Tod D. Brown
Re: The Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum
Date: 10 July 2007

On Saturday, July 7, 2007, our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI issued an Apostolic Letter “Motu Proprio data,” (on his own initiative) entitled, Summorum Pontificum, on the use of the Roman liturgy prior to the reform of 1970. Together with the Motu Proprio was a personal letter from the Holy Father to the Bishops of the world that provided an historical and pastoral context for the issuance of the Motu Proprio.

The following link to the Bishop’s Committee on the Liturgy newsletter (http://www.usccb.org/liturgy/bclnewsletterjune07.pdf) will provide a copy of the Motu Proprio together with its introductory letter from our Holy Father as well as a series of “Twenty Questions on the Apostolic Letter Summorum Pontificum” prepared by the Secretariat for the Liturgy of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, that may provide helpful directives in our appropriate pastoral response to the Apostolic Letter.

I welcome the Holy Father's call for unity within the Church and especially toward those who are attached to celebrating the Mass according to the Missal of 1962. My abiding desire is for unity and harmony among all our Catholic faithful in our Diocese. That is why, in anticipation of the promulgation of this Motu Proprio, I took the initiative to inaugurate an additional Latin so-called “Tridentine” Mass at the Pope John Paul II Center.

Our Holy Father clearly underscores the fact that the norm or “Forma ordinaria” of the Eucharistic Liturgy remains the Missal published by Pope Paul VI, now in its third typical edition. Use of the last version of the Missale Romanum published under the authority of Blessed John XXIII in 1962, will now be able to be used as a “Forma extraordinaria” of the liturgical celebration under the provisions expressed in the Apostolic Letter.

I urge all pastors to join me in a common pastoral approach to the implementation of the Motu Proprio. It is the prerogative of pastors when requested by “a group of faithful (coetus fidelium) attached to the previous liturgical tradition exists stably (or continuously) (continenter exsistit),” i.e., parishioners in the full canonical sense of that term, and who request the celebration of the Holy Mass according to the rite of the Roman Missal published in 1962, together with the other liturgical celebrations as specified in the Apostolic Letter, it is their prerogative to “willingly accede (libenter suscipiat) to their requests, if the following conditions can be pastorally met:

· The availability of a priest, in good standing, who can demonstrate a minimum rubrical and linguistic ability to celebrate the extraordinary form.

· The ‘group’ of the faithful (that) exists ‘stably’ needs to be of sufficient number to warrant the public use of the forma extraordinaria. Individuals who are not geographically or intentionally part of a particular parish community should have recourse to their proper parish with their request or to the existing public celebrations that presently are offered in the Diocese of Orange at Mission San Juan Capistrano and Pope John Paul II Center.

· If the public celebration of the Eucharist in forma extraordinaria is conceded in accord with the norms as articulated in the Apostolic Letter (Art. #6), serious consideration should be given in using the Readings in the vernacular using the reformed Lectionary for Mass and its expanded cursus of Scripture texts. In this way, the entire parish community, whether utilizing the forma ordinaria or the public forma extraordinaria may be united in heart and mind around a single proclamation of God’s word.

While great responsibility is placed upon the pastor of the local parish in making these pastoral determinations, it remains for the Bishop of the Local Church in his role as moderator of the liturgy in his own diocese, to insure peace and serenity in the implementation of the universal norms of the Church regarding the worthy celebration of the liturgy as well as to intervene to prevent abuses from arising with regard to liturgical celebrations in his diocese.

As pastors charged with the care of souls it is incumbent upon us to do whatever we can to help build a greater sense of communion in our local Church where divisions may exist particularly in areas of liturgical praxis. May this Apostolic Letter be an opportunity for us all to renew our commitment to being worthy stewards of the Holy Mysteries faithfully celebrated in accord with the rich Tradition of the Church.

12:00 PM Tridentine Masses will resume at St. Mary's by the Sea in Huntington Beach beginning on September 16, 2007. Unfortunately, the readings will be from the "current Lectionary", which is somewhat confusing, especially since the readings from the "current Lectionary" don't fit the Tridentine calendar.

Here is the bulletin from St. Mary's by the Sea: St. Mary's by the Sea Parish Bulletin, July 14-15, 2007

In so far as Bishop Brown's letter, I will only comment on one part.

Bishop Brown said:

"I welcome the Holy Father's call for unity within the Church and especially toward those who are attached to celebrating the Mass according to the Missal of 1962. My abiding desire is for unity and harmony among all our Catholic faithful in our Diocese. That is why, in anticipation of the promulgation of this Motu Proprio, I took the initiative to inaugurate an additional Latin so-called “Tridentine” Mass at the Pope John Paul II Center."

Why does that part of his message remind me of the scene in The Song of Bernadette where the mayor tells Bernadette (in front of the media and other onlookers) that he always supported her and he remembers a time when he (the mayor) and Bernadette stood alone against much opposition?

You may recall that I commented on Bishop Brown's pre-motu proprio indult here: Indult or Insult?

Any thoughts?

Comments

[TradCath]

My thought is maybe you should simply smile and say, "Thank you, your eminence" instead of trying to continue some grudge against him. You have what you want now. Be grateful. Burry the hatchet. And move on and do God's work.

[carol blankfield]

Watching the EWTN special re: the new motu proprio (Raymond Arroyo), I believe it was B. Bruskewitz who stated that NO, the Novus Ordo lectionary is NOT to be used and it is the old calendar that is to be used - with the readings from the old missal.
(as I recall) - Does anyone else remember hearing that or is the video of the special available anywhere to confirm this?

[Miguel]

The Tridentine Mass with the current Novus Ordo lectionary is not what we wanted, nor is it what is stated in the Motu Proprio. The MP states that the readings may be in the venacular, not that they may taken from the current NO lectionary. This has nothing to do with any grudge against Bishop Brown.

I simply don't understand TradCath's perspective.

[glorybe]

As one of the original members of Restore the Sacred, I think it is a time of thanksgiving and prayer. I truly believe we must move on and with Our Lord's help, both Masses will be said with reverence and great love for our Tradition. Time is an important factor for all the wrinkles to be ironed out. We have prayed and worked very hard to get to this point and I believe we should be gracious and thankful for what we have at this present time. Our Lord will supply the rest.

[Manuel]

"Art. 6. In Masses celebrated with the people according to the Missal of Blessed John XXIII, the Readings can be proclaimed even in the vernacular, using editions that have received the recognitio of the Apostolic See"

The Motu Proprio gives the authority to use any edition approved by Rome. It does not give authority to change the readings! In the Tridentine Mass, when the priest says the readings in the vernacular he is translating only! If this were to take place the priest would making a "hybrid" Mass which is not called by the MP. This cannot take place. The readings must be only translated!

[Patrick]

Carol,

I heard (EWTN special) the USCCB liturgy guy say something about using the NO lectinary. He was immediately shot down by another voice who said that is not what the MP says. I had trouble keeping the voices straight, since I was listening online. I wonder if the program is archived.

Using the NO lectionary will make a mess of it. I guess it is a way of tossing in a monkey wrench. I wonder what will come next.

[Brian S.]

I have The World Over episode on Tivo (I'll post it on YouTube if anyone can tell me how).
Father Baker says clearly that an "approved edition" is one of the approved translations of the 1962 Missale Romanum. There are a few of them. This DOES NOT mean that a priest may incorporate a modern lectionary.
This needs to be brought to Bp. Brown's, and other bishops', attention. This makes me thankful that the Holy Father chose to make the effective date two months away. This gives time for clarification to be sought and hopefully provided from Ecclesia Dei.

[Miguel]

This may be a good time to drop a line over to Ecclesia Dei for clarification before such an abuse becomes entrenched. I would bet than some Bishops will try to impose female altar boys, and standing for communion also, and whatever else they can get away with.

[angela]

3/4ths of the problem comes with people who don't understand the English Language, and it's grammatical idiosyncrasies.

"Art. 6. In Masses celebrated with the people according to the Missal of Blessed John XXIII, the Readings can be proclaimed even in the vernacular, using editions that have received the recognitio of the Apostolic See"

IN MASSES CELEBRATED...ACCORDING TO THE MISSAL (of Blessed John XXIII)...USING EDITIONS (of the Missal of Blessed John XXIII)....

These guys are either outright stupid or evil. Either way, they shouldn't be bishops.

[TradCath]

Miguel, my perspective is that now we have recourse to the Tridentine mass, and I am grateful. Rather than carrying some immature grudge and sniveling like children, maybe it's time for certain elements who spent the bulk of their existence complaining to turn a corner. Apparently it is the mistake of this "Fr Martin" who states he will be using the currently lectionary with the missal of John XXIII, which as many have already stated, is clearly wrong. Members of that parish can politely (see: POLITELY) bring this to the attention of the priest in question. If it goes higher, we now have recourse to get this resolved as well.

This is my perspective. STOP WHINING.

[Miguel]

TC: Sounds like your whining to me. It is all a matter of perspective, after all. But to state that Fr. ("kneeling is a mortal sin" Martin is merely mistaken is to infer more goodwill to him that is perhaps called for.

This is my perspective. So, please (note the politeness) STOP WHINING.

[Thomistic]

TradCath,

Your perspective is interesting, albeit misguided, and certainly not new.

Having endured lectures from armchair quarterbacks about how its best to do nothing or say nothing or pray, pay, and obey for several years, I'm used to hearing the things you've said.

It's amusing to hear you say it at this point, especially given all that's happened.

In so far as referring to "certain elements who spent the bulk of their existence complaining" and speaking of how those "elements" are "carrying some immature grudge and sniveling like children", I have to wonder how well informed you could possibly be to say something so utterly ignorant, rude, and irresponsible?

Do you honestly think all people cared about was the Tridentine Mass?

Bishop Brown has promoted the most liberal priests in Orange County to positions of power in his chancery. These liberal priests have not only promoted error, but persecuted orthodoxy. Bishop Brown has also endorsed homosexual domestic partnerships and has a long track record of questionable orthodoxy with respect to homosexuality, especially in terms of dealing with homosexual priests in Orange County, one of whom was looking at pornographic pictures of boys on his laptop.

Yet you have the temerity to refer to the legitimate issues these people have raised with snide condescension?

Read these articles:

Catholics lash out at California bishop

Vocations director under fire in California

Maybe you should rethink your position.

At any rate, before doing any more armchair quaterbacking, you should at least know what you're talking about.

Pax,

Thomistic

Thomistic,

I can honestly say that I have done more work to bring about the plight of Traditional Catholics and champion the cause of the restoration of the Tridentine mass than most people you will find on this blog, or even meet in life. I am a member of 3 separate organizations whose sole aim was the restoration of the Tridentine mass. I have orchestrated and taken part in letter-writing campaigns, phone campaigns, made several in-person pleas as well as spoken at length on the subject. And I have done all this in the spirit of good will and fraternity/agape within the church, always careful not to alienate or label/brand those who do not share our views (or are openly hostile to them). I have done all this while at the same time praying, which is afterall, the best remedy for everything.

This thread is now moot, since in a future thread, you point out how it was a big misunderstanding and all your cackling and cawing over this non-issue was for naught. Our Pope spelled it all out very well this time, and WE need to trust in him and trust that the spirit is indeed moving within our church. AND as I stated previously, we now have a direct recourse for when things go contrary to what has been stated.

If you want to continue a campaign of negativity, then that is your choice. I am simply stating that if you continue to do so, you and your ilk will come off as whiners who will never be pleased with anything.

That first sentence should read "to bring out to the open" and not "bring about". That is my bad English at work, and not some freudian slip : )

[Thomistic]

I have never said it was all just a "misunderstanding". Bishop Brown's proposed hybrid Mass was jettisoned precisely because of publicity and the resultant complaints.

In so far as your ability to work for the restoration of the TLM in "the spirit of good will and fraternity/agape within the Church, always careful not to alienate or label/brand those who do not share our views (or are openly hostile to them)", I have trouble believing that, since your post is so uncharitable to me, with whom you apparently disagree.

Before you twist your arm publicly patting yourself on the back for what a kind, wonderful, reasonable traditionalist you are when dealing with those with whom you disagree, you might want to rethink using words like "cackling and cawing" to describe the actions of those with whom you disagree.

Moreover, before you tell people their actions were for naught, you might want to get the facts, or is the pretense of "the spirit of good will and fraternity/agape within the Church, always careful not to alienate or label/brand those who do not share our views (or are openly hostile to them)" more important than not committing the sin of rash judgment?

Pax,

Thomistic

[TradCath]

All I can say is your words have not been charitable to me or to the Bishop on this thread. So, before you pontificate on charity, you might want to meditate on the word and its meaning.

As far as Bishop Brown is concerned, something tells me that no matter what he does, he will not placate or satisfy you as your perceived wounds are too deep. I don't live in your diocese, or anywhere near, so I can't say I have any stake in this feud one way or another. Just know that from a totally impartial view, it looks like you are carrying on a grudge against someone that even standing barefoot at Canossa or sack-cloth and ashes would not cure.

[Thomistic]

I'm sorry that you don't understand the situation properly. Your confusion is due to ignorance, and is therefore not entirely your fault. However, passing judgement on others without having all the facts is a sin. It's known as rash judgment.

It's hilarious that you refer to the differences between many faithful Catholics in Orange County and Bishop Tod Brown a "feud".

Yes, that's it, we're just feuding!

Who cares if the bishop supports and hides homosexual priests, one of whom was caught with pictures of naked boys on his laptop? Who cares if he knowingly allowed the priest he had as director of liturgy and evangelization to live with his (at least onetime) gay lover? Who cares if he promotes agenda driven liberals to positions of authority within his chancery? Who cares if he sends a fax to all of his priests saying he supports legal recognition for homosexual domestic partnerships?

It's much simpler to stand back from a distance and say it's all a feud over matters of personal liturgical preferences being perpetuated by a pack of prickly, unforgiving traditionalists.

I'm sorry, but you don't know what you're talking about and can't be taken seriously. It's difficult to believe you are, in fact, a "TradCath" when you don't support exposing a bishop who has undermined the Catholic faith in this diocese because of his own allegiance to a liberal agenda.

Pax,

Thomistic

[TradCath]

And I'm sorry you don't know how to practice the faith you supposedly champion. Your last post speaks volumes.

[Thomistic]

I'm sorry you seem to think it's wrong to speak the truth. I have not lied and I haven't insulted you, so I'm confused as to how I don't know how to practice the faith.

Are you someone who always needs to be right?

It just doesn't make sense that you have any criticism about what I said in my last post.

You have made some rash judgments from a distance and have expressed those rash judgments in a way that was both tactless and unkind, but now that someone has bluntly replied to your judgments and uncharitable characterizations, you're playing the "charity" card?

Pax,

Thomistic

[Johannim]

I live in the little kingdom of tod brown & roger mahoney for that matter and for what I have to say I can be certain I will be blocked aka "cencored" by this blog for lack of dah "charity". Tod brown & roger mahoney and hundreds more of the presbyters and alumni of St. John's seminary in California ARE HETERODOX not to mention a top heavy percentage of the bishops appointed by paul 6 & particularly John Paul 2. With the coming of Summorum Pontificum and the return of the Ancient Classic Mass the beginning of the end of the rape of the Catholic church has begun & the millions who have left the Catholic church since the debacle called vatican 2 just may consider returning, I will & i'm a convert. In the end look to these rogue prelates and liturgical culteral marxists to attempt to corrupt the Ancient Mass oft times referred to as the Tridentine Mass. As a budding anthropologist I over the years witnessed the masinations of the reactionary as they took over the rule of the Catholic church in the halls of the vatican and attempted to BASTARDIZE &HYBRIDIZE THIS 2000 year old institution. It will not happen simply because God himself will stop this heresy that was vatican 2 and it self destroying aftermath. IT IS MILLIONS OF CATHOLIC YOUTH WORLDWIDE THAT DEMAND A RETURN TO ORTHODOXY.

[Johannim]

As for thomistic, the apologist, even the Messiah himself took a whip to the moneychangers in Gods holy Temple in Jerusalem and you can apologize and excuse "in phoney charity" and excuse excuse excuse for these apostates in the heart of the Catholic church, tod brown roger mahoney, Lavada the now dead bernardin suenan and lustiger were and are apostates not to mention kaspar and daneel in Belgium and there are thousands more of them thanks to montini, and a few other popes