Yes, we shall see soon....

I guess I haven't taken Father Zuhlsdorf's advice. I stated earlier that we wouldn't know the value we can assign to this motu proprio until we see what the Ecclesia Dei Commission really does for the faithful, particularly with the most recalcitrant ordinaries.

And well, I guess we shall see soon. Father Z has got his hands on a statement from Tod Brown, Bishop of Orange. In it, we see the bishop (1) dividing and conquering, isolating the "stable groups of the faithful" by requiring them to go to their geographic pastors, and (2) mildly threatening any decent clerics that might be left in the diocese to wait for him to take the lead, (3) contain the Mass at the tiny chapel in San Juan Capistrano and (4) wreck any new attempt at restoring the Mass by calling on the use of the modern lectionary (with, we can only assume, the crappy ICEL translations we've all fled.)

Anyways, if you want to read it with Fr. Z's commentary, CLICK HERE. Or see below for snippets with no commentary (my own, perhaps less charitable, commentary has been attempted, but deleted). We'll see what happens in the Diocese of Orange, and we'll know where the Church is headed.

OFFICE OF THE BISHOP
Marywood Center
P.O Box 1419
2811 E. Villa Real Drive
Orange, California 92863-1595
PHONE (714) 282-3105
FAX (714) 282-3029

MEMORANDUM

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

I urge all pastors to join me in a common pastoral approach to the implementation of the Moto 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.

Hey, dude, where in this store do you keep the New Coke?

The Coca Cola Company allows production of "Coca Cola Classic"
By John Thavis Coca Cola News Service

ATLANTA (CNS) -- In a long-awaited overture to disaffected soda traditionalists, the president of the Coca Cola Company allowed limited production of "Coca Cola Classic," the original formula soft drink which was recently replaced by New Coke.

The president said the Classic formula should be made available in to consumers who desire it. He said that while New Coke, introduced a few months ago, will remain the flagship product of the brand, Classic Coke should be considered "the extraordinary form of the Coca Cola product."

This reintroduction implies no failure of the New Coke production and marketing plan, but simply "two variations on the one flagship Coca Cola product." The president's directive came July 7 in a four-page letter to bottlers titled "Introducing Coca Cola Classic." The old formula will begin appearing in bottles and cans--not in fountains--Sept. 14. An accompanying personal letter from the president dismissed fears that the decisions would foment divisions among Coke drinkers or be seen as a retreat from the New Coke campaign.

The president said New Coke would certainly remain the company's predominant product. Drinking Coca Cola Classic presupposes a certain degree of sophistication and traditional preferences and "neither of these is found very often," he said. But the president expressed sympathy with consumers who are attached to the old Coke formula and uncomfortable with New Coke.

In the period since the introduction of New Coke, he said, excessive, Pepsi-like sweetness often led to "unfinished bottles and unsatisfactory mixes with rum and bourbon which were hard to bear.""I am speaking from experience, since I, too, lived through that period with all its hopes and confusion. And I have seen how arbitrary changes in the formula caused deep pain to individuals totally rooted in the old formula," he said.

The president noted that many older consumers have a long connection with the Classic formula. But in recent years, he said, it has been clearly demonstrated that young people are also attracted by the old formula.

By widening its availability, the president said, he hoped to make the new and old Coca Cola formulas "mutually enriching."

The old formula has been hoarded and bottled by small, out-of-the-way bottlers since shortly after the introduction of the new formula, but customers had to make special trips--often hundreds of miles and beg bottlers for it, who did not always consent.

...[T]he new policy did not explicitly state that those buying Coca Cola Classic were also expected to buy New Coke. The company said that crossover purchasers would be presumed, however.

He emphasized that although the new formula was designed to replace the old formula, the old formula was "never formally abandoned." Its restoration as an extraordinary product thus does not undermine the company's decisions with respect to New Coke, he said.

"There is no contradiction between the two formulas. In the history of our company there is growth and progress, but no rupture," he said."What earlier generations held as a good product remains such, and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful," he said.

Hmm. Anytime Skylstad is involved....

OK, while it's great to see pious women abandoning the dispair of the sedevacantist position, I have to wonder:

(a) Why would the choose to make their obedience under the care of such a lousy steward as is Bp. Skylstaad? Maybe they could have jumped over to Bishop Vasa's diocese and had a much more sane reintroduction into full communion.

(b) How much have these nuns agreed to pay on the Spokane bankruptcy settlement?

(c) How do they like the new Mass? Skylstad isn't known as one particularly solicitous of traddies. How many kumbayas will it take before they start wondering if the seat of Spokane is really empty?

(d) If they reach the conclusion I fear they might in question (c) above, would they then be"Sedespokantists?"

I remain the skeptic

Yes, despite what everyone says, I still remain skeptical. Maybe, just maybe, if the people in Springfield, and in Orange, and in Houston, and elsewhere, are accommodated in short order (especially if that accomodation comes quickly from the Ecclesia Dei commission over the local ordinary's stalling tactics, and we see Rome taking care of traddies), that skepticism will fade. But for now, I remain skeptical.

For instance, a statement that priests of the old-rite orders (sorry, I'm not good enough at Romanitas to go along and say "two forms of the same rite")....ahem, a statement that priests of the old-rite orders can't in principle refuse to say the newfangled Mass....such a statement seems like a little time bomb.

I'm sorry, Fr. X, but your objections to the N.O. as a baser form of liturgy are unacceptable. You're assigned to say the N.O. every Sunday at 9am--maybe it would ok if you said a public Tridentine Mass Sunday at 3:30 pm.

On the other hand, if Fr. Y can't say the N.O. because he has a tee time....well....that's a practical reason, not a principled one. Perhaps Fr. X oughta take up golf.

How many does St. Vincent's seat?

It may be crowded at St. Vincents during the Triduum next year:

Art. 2. In Masses celebrated without the people, each Catholic priest of the Latin rite, whether secular or regular, may use the Roman Missal published by Bl. Pope John XXIII in 1962, or the Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1970, and may do so on any day with the exception of the Easter Triduum. For such celebrations, with either one Missal or the other, the priest has no need for permission from the Apostolic See or from his Ordinary. [emphasis added].

As I feared, this motu proprio restores nothing to us, the laity, nothing, either in principle or in practice. And in practice, it actually takes away from the clerics: they can no longer celebrate the holiest liturgies of the year in the old rite, and those haggard diocesan clerics, ordinarily limited to one Mass on a feria, in practice won't have the ability to say the old Mass as they want to. The reprehensible modernist bishops have one another battle. You can just hear Cardinal Murphy Cormac O'Connor gloating about it, happy to avoid any prayers that would lead infidels, heretics and schismatics to the one true faith.

So all of you in Springfield, Missouri, and other places subject to oppressive modernist regimes, you won't be assisting at an authorized traditional Mass anytime soon.