California bishop responds to lay group (re Tridentine Mass)

Renew America ^ | September 14, 2006 | Matt C. Abbott

[NYer]

In the ongoing saga in the Diocese of Orange, Calif., Bishop Tod Brown has formally responded to the Catholic lay group Restore the Sacred. The text of the bishop's letter (dated September 6, 2006), which was sent to a member of Restore the Sacred, is as follows:

Dear [Name Withheld],



I have been reflecting on the meeting I had with you and others from St. Mary's by the Sea Parish on the 10th of July. I was impressed by the love for our Catholic faith and the dedication to St. Mary's by the Sea parish that all of you manifested. You helped me to understand your concerns more fully and I appreciated the clear and respectful way that you answered my questions.



As I told you I would, I directed Father Martin Tran to present in your parish bulletin a fuller, and I trust, acceptable apology and clarification of his views on obedience, mortal sin, and kneeling. He has done this and has assured me that he is hoping to be able to work with you and all those who attend the parish in a respectful and productive manner.



One of the things that came out clearly in your description of the "traditions of St. Mary's" was that I and my predecessors did you no service when we allowed Fr. Johnson to deviate from the liturgical norms set out by church authority. You feel now a sense of betrayal and your request for a restoration of what you consider nine fundamental past traditions reflects your desire to hold on to an experience that has, in some important ways, nourished your faith over a long period of time. I apologize for the hurt and misunderstanding this has caused.



That having been said, let me address the particular requests you made in your document and in your presentation:



• The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has determined that in the United States, Holy Communion is received standing and that the appropriate sign of respect is a bow of the head before the Sacrament. The Diocese of Orange is obliged to observe this norm. It is helpful to reflect on why the Church in the United States has mandated this posture: standing is appropriate for those who are risen with Christ and who seek the things that are above. As people united in faith, we are also united in our common posture which serves to foster the intention and spiritual attitude of being one in Christ.
  
  

• In this diocese I have determined that the faithful will stand from the Great Amen until after receiving Holy Communion. This posture reflects our humble gratitude for the great things God has done in creating and redeeming us. We also recognize the eschatological significance of standing as we look forward to the day when Christ will come again and pray that Christ may find us worthy to stand before Him. After the reception of communion, each participant is free to kneel or sit, however they choose.
  
  

• The Sign of Peace is exchanged as a token of Christian communion, as a sign of our fellowship and unity before we partake in the ultimate sign of our unity, the Body and Blood of Christ. The custom of our culture would commonly be shaking hands, though the manner of the exchange is left up to the individual. It is important, however, that the priest celebrant express with the faithful gathered their ecclesial communion and mutual charity before partaking in Holy Communion.
  
  

• The participation of women as altar servers, cantors, and lectors, is a sign of the basic equality of every baptized member of Christ: we are all called to service in light of our God given gifts. It has also been determined in 1971 by the Bishop's Committee on the Liturgy in consultation with the Vatican, that this is a legitimate liturgical practice. To remove women from the sanctuary would denigrate the fundamental dignity of women ad their complementary role in God's created world.
  
  

• It is the purview of the local administrator whether or not the celebrants at Masses should have the assistance of extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist and the placement and furnishings of the sanctuary. He is also responsible for overseeing the selection of all music to be used at parish liturgies; I refer you to him about these matters.
  
  

• In view of the context of so much negative publicity, public protests and controversy associated with the liturgy at St. Mary's by the Sea, I judge that the restoration of the Tridentine Mass at your parish at this time would only cause greater disunity and confusion. Although you may not be aware of it, there are a considerable number of parishioners who are grateful for the changes that brought their parish in conformity with other parishes in our Diocese. They and the people of the Diocese generally would likely view permission for the Tridentine Mass so close upon the protests as nothing less than a capitulation to a special interest group. This is not to say that, sometime in the future, there may be an appropriate time when the question can be raised again.
  
  

My decision on these requests is based upon my ecclesiology. What unifies us most is the Blessed Sacrament that we share at Mass and, most significantly, in the reception of communion. This is where there should be some uniformity in our life as Catholics. Although there is room for variety in music, preaching and the way these rights are celebrated, these all must adhere to the backbone of liturgical legislation set down by the church. Outside the Mass, there is great room for other rites and prayer forms (Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament, 40 Hours devotions, the Liturgy of the Hours, novenas, etc.) which can be done in the "traditional" manner and with the sacred music that is so dear to you. There are even adaptations approved for the Liturgy of the Eucharist (Eucharistic processions, which I think you have had in the past, is one example) which you may wish to consider with Fr. Martin.



I recognize that this letter is likely a disappointment to you. You were hoping for so much more. Be assured that my decisions mean you no disrespect. On the contrary, I hope my clarity makes it possible for us, should you choose, to work together to preserve what you love about the Catholic Church in ways that match our liturgical norms.



In Christ Our Savior,



Most Reverend Tod D. Brown
Bishop of the Diocese of Orange

[dsc]

"odd "

If by "odd" you mean "the work of Satan," I agree.

[dsc]

"odd "

If by "odd" you mean "the work of Satan," I agree.

[Fast Ed97]

Here is this Bishop's "Liturgy" for 2005!

[Fast Ed97]

In this diocese I have determined that the faithful will stand from the Great Amen until after receiving Holy Communion. This posture reflects our humble gratitude for the great things God has done in creating and redeeming us. We also recognize the eschatological significance of standing as we look forward to the day when Christ will come again and pray that Christ may find us worthy to stand before Him.

What did he just say? In actuality all of this standing these modernist bishops are promoting really has to do with emphasizing the finding "the presence of Jesus in the community" rather than in "that breadbox in the altar"

[dsc]

"This is why the Indult is by Diocese"

I think the reason the indult is by diocese is that a universal indult would be the death knell of the anemic, far inferior Novus Ordo.

SSPX forced the enemies of The Church to back down a little, to the extent of instituting an effortlessly ignored indult procedure, but that was just a punt. They still intend to stomp out the Tridentine once and for all.

[Kolokotronis]

"...and not subject to manipulation by snot-nosed Committee academics."

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm sorry, but the image of a bunch of oh so evolved and pious and inclusive acedemics sitting around a polished oak table with runny noses is just hilarious!

[NYer]

When I go to the Byzantine Ruthenian Catholic Church in my town, I stand, because that's the appropriate posture. But not not at the Latin rite parishes.

Welcome 'east'!

The Eastern Catholic Churches administer communion, standing. It is a form of reverence. It has taken me a while to distinguish the differences between west and east. Fortunately in my Maronite parish, Father respects both traditions. We kneel during the Words of Institution, receive communion by intinction standing, and may kneel or stand after communion. Then again, as Kolokotronis has pointed out on many occasions, the Maronite Church is the most latinized of all the Eastern Catholic Churches. No matter. We're all respected and accomodated in our personal choice of reverence for the Real Presence of our Lord in the Eucharist. (Keyword being, reverence rather than proscribed posture). Bishop Tod would do well to make a similar distinction.

[Kolokotronis]

"We're all respected and accomodated in our personal choice of reverence for the Real Presence of our Lord in the Eucharist."

Truth be told, the reason Orthodox and Eastern Rite Catholics stand on Sundays is because it is a celebration of the Resurrection. Kneeling and better yet full prostrations are symbols, in the East, of repentance and by tradition are reserved for weekdays. Reverence is shown by deep bowing.

Different traditions, same Eucharist.

[flaglady47]

I love your choice of name. Highly inventive.

[flaglady47]

During the Reformation the Protestants returned to receiving while standing to show there rejection of the Catholic teaching on transubstantiation and to deny a distinction between the ordained clergy and the laity. It is within this historical context that Catholics react against standing for Communion.

I can only speak to my own experience that when young, raised as a member of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, we kneeled at the altar rail when taking communion. We also took both wine and wafer, and the wine was from a communal cup (later they went to individual cups). I was later confirmed in the Catholic church upon marriage. I don't like a lot of the modern "innovations" in the Catholic church, and frankly, the Lutheran church I attended as a child was much more traditional than many modern-day Catholic churches (Tridentine Mass churches being the exception).

[Petrosius]

It is hard to make general statements concerning Protestants. It is to be remembered that the Lutherans are among the most liturgical and share a belief in the Real Presence (although by way of consubstantiation, not transubstantiation). My remarks would be more correctly aimed at those who follow the Calvinist tradition.

[flaglady47]

"As you have previously posted, you are no longer Catholic. Why on earth are the worship practices of those who are Catholic any of your non-Catholic business?????"

I'm not Black. Guess I can't form or give an opinion on anything that has to do with Blacks. I'm not Hispanic. Guess I can't have an opinion there either. I'm not Jewish, so I can't get on any thread dealing with the Jewish religion. Get it yet? Stop trying to stifle free speech on FREE Republic. That's why we are all on this website.

[flaglady47]

Explain to me the difference here. Is it a difference without a distinction? I don't get the major difference, if there is one. Would appreciate your interpretation:

Transubstantiaion:
1 : an act or instance of transubstantiating or being transubstantiated
2 : the miraculous change by which according to Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox dogma the eucharistic elements at their consecration become the body and blood of Christ while keeping only the appearances of bread and wine

Consubstantiation:
Main Entry: con·sub·stan·ti·a·tion
Function: noun
Pronunciation: "kän(t)-s&b-"stan(t)-she-'A-sh&n
: the actual substantial presence and combination of the body and blood of Christ with the eucharistic bread and wine according to a teaching associated with Martin Luther -- compare

[Petrosius]

The main difference is that in transubstantiation it is believed that the substance of the bread and wine are actually changed into the substance of the body and blood of our Lord; that only the appearance of bread and wine remain, not their substance. The "trans" in transubstantiation mean beyond the substance.

In consubstantiation it is believed that the substanstance of the bread and wine remain and that our Lord becomes present with the continuing presence of the bread and wine. The "con" in consubstantiation means with the substance.

The Catholic belief in transubstantiation is based on the fact that our Lord said: "This is my body," rather than "Here is my body."

[flaglady47]

After reading your link regarding denominations, it really points out how far afield from the original Catholic Church the Christian religion has come. As Martin Luther said on his deathbed (I'm paraphrasing here) now any Milkmaid can start a new religion. Even Martin Luther had a momentary vision of what was to become. In our day and age, I see many parallels with the Hellenistic Age, when sects and cults multiplied greatly. The Hellenistic Age was one of great uncertainty, with many wars and societal instability. Just like today, when we live in an age of great uncertainty, and new denominations, sects, and cults are springing up with great regularity. What goes around comes around.

[flaglady47]

The Catholic belief in transubstantiation is based on the fact that our Lord said: "This is my body," rather than "Here is my body."

Thanks. That helps clear it up a bit; however, it still seems a bit of hairsplitting, as both definitions seem to say that the body and blood of Christ is within the wafer and wine. Am I interpreting this right, that with trans it is actual body and blood even though looking like wafer and wine, whereas with con it is body and blood somehow mixed in with still actual bread and wine?

[vincentjay]

" Why on earth are the worship practices of those who are Catholic any of your non-Catholic business?????"

Why do drivers slow down to look at a car wreck?

[vincentjay]

"Stop trying to stifle free speech on FREE Republic. That's why we are all on this website."

Good eye, Flaglady. :)

[dsc]

"Stop trying to stifle free speech on FREE Republic."

Wouldn't dream of it. Please do horn in on our family squabble.

[vincentjay]

"Denominationalism started with the Protestants, not the Catholic Church. We are not a denomination."

The word "church" is a translation of the Greek "ekklesia," which means "those who are called out." All Christians, whether they be catholic or non-catholic, are called out of the world by Jesus, thus we are all part of that body of people which the bible calls the "ekklesia." Any one group which is a subset of that body and which denominates itself by some name (e.g., catholic) is a denomination.

I'm as much a part of Jesus' church as you are. In as much as I am in communion with Jesus, I am in communion with His church. It's His Spirit in us which unifies us, not some outward allegience to a denominational subset of the church.