Back in '05, I put up a post on today's celebration of either the chains themselves or of the church in Rome, with some images of the church and the tomb of Pope Julius II, as well as today's lessons from the breviary: August 1, St Peter in Chains (Lammas Day). Lammas Day refers to the blessing of the loaves of bread from the first harvest of wheat, since in ancient calendars, August 1 was the start of the harvest and the first day of Autumn.

G. Thomas Fitzpatrick, at The Portiuncola Indulgence, has a post up about this Franciscan feast. It has a connection with the United States, in that the original name for the city of Los Angeles in California, was El Pueblo de Nuestra Señora la Reina de los Angeles de Porciúncula. Source: Where Did the Name Los Angeles Come From?

The name Los Angeles is Spanish for The Angels. There is much more to this name, however. On Wednesday, August 2, 1769, Father Juan Crespi, a Franciscan priest accompanying the first European land expedition through California, led by Captain Fernando Rivera Y Moncado, described in his journal a "beautiful river from the northwest" located at "34 degrees 10 minutes." They named the river Nuestra Señora de los Angeles de la Porciúncula. In the Franciscan calendar, August 2 was the day of the celebration of the feast of the Perdono at the tiny Assisi chapel of St. Francis of Assisi. Early in St. Francis' life, the Benedictines had given him this tiny chapel for his use near Assisi. The chapel, ruined and in need of repair, was located on what the Italians called a porziuncola or "very small parcel of land." Painted on the wall behind the altar was a fresco of the Virgin Mary surrounded by angels. Now contained within a Basilica, the chapel was named Saint Mary of the Angels at the Little Portion. The newly discovered "beautiful river" was named in honor of this celebration and this chapel. In 1781, a new settlement was established along that river. The settlement came to be known as El Pueblo de Nuestra Señora la Reina de los Angeles de Porciúncula or The Town of Our Lady the Queen of Angels of the Little Portion although its official name was simply El Pueblo de la Reina de Los Angeles.

Thanks to Ted Hewitt pointing this out in his email on the Medieval Saints Yahoo group.

Posts at the Juventutem and Juventutem-Ireland blogs pointed me to Fr Glen Tattersall's article Benedict XVI's liturgical armistice: 'Summorum Pontificum', which contains these remarks:

The Apostolic Letter, Summorum Pontificum . . . is a ground-breaking reconciliation between the Roman Missals of 1570 and 1970.

The fundamental canonical point of Summorum Pontificum is that the ancient or historical usage of the Roman Rite, as codified in the Missal of Pope St Pius V in 1570 and reissued in its last form by Blessed Pope John XXIII in 1962, was not abrogated or abolished by the subsequent promulgation in 1970 of a newer usage of the Roman Rite, following Vatican Council II, by Pope Paul VI. . . .

They [the Roman Missal promulgated by Paul VI and the Roman Missal promulgated by St Pius V and reissued by Bl. John XXIII] are, in fact, two uses of the one Roman rite. [quoting Summorum Pontificum] . . .

One can only say that Benedict has used the keys of St Peter with the wisdom of Solomon! By maintaining the unity of the Roman Rite, with two usages, the Pontiff not only refuses to canonise extremism in any direction, but provides perhaps the most powerful example possible of the 'hermeneutic of continuity and reform' . . .

The reference to Solomon's wisdom recalls the parable of the two harlots in I Kings iii:

23 Then said the king: The one saith, My child is alive, and thy child is dead. And the other answereth: Nay, but thy child is dead, and mine liveth.

24 The king therefore said: Bring me a sword. And when they had brought a sword before the king,

25 Divide, said he, the living child in two, and give half to the one, and half to the other.

26 But the woman whose child was alive, said to the king, (for her bowels were moved upon her child,) I beseech thee, my lord, give her the child alive, and do not kill it. But the other said: Let it be neither mine nor thine, but divide it.

27 The king answered, and said: Give the living child to this woman, and let it not be killed, for she is the mother thereof.

28 And all Israel heard the judgment which the king had judged, and they feared the king, seeing that the wisdom of God was in him to do judgment.

In our time, the Holy Father has declared that the 1962 and 1969/1970 Missals are two forms of one rite, uniting them thereby, and declaring that no division exists between the expressions in each of the Church's teachings (see Summorum Pontificum, article 1, and the letter to bishops accompanying it).

There is no contradiction between the two editions of the Roman Missal. In the history of the liturgy there is growth and progress, but no rupture.

For some time before the motu propio Summorum Pontificum, there were efforts to establish a personal apostolic adminstration for clergy and laity adhering to the 1962 Missal and the other liturgical books then in use. The only personal apostolic administration existing today is in Brazil, the Personal Apostolic Administration of Saint John Mary Vianney. Wikipedia has a history and discussion of it at Personal Apostolic Administration of Saint John Mary Vianney. In 2005, William Basile's Report FIUV General Assemblee in Rome - 2005 stated that 'the PAA (Personal Apostolic Administration) carries significant problems, not the least of which are the many concordats given between the Holy See and various European countries which would have to be amended or entirely re-written before a PAA could be established anywhere there', ascribing those views to Msgr Perl of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei.

Summorum Pontificum exclusively treats the use of the 1962 liturgical books at the parish and diocesan levels (with the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei granted unspecified powers and authority to resolve the motu propio's implementation), and the Pope, in his Letter to Accompany Summorum Pontificum invites bishops to report in three years to the Vatican on fulfilling it. The Pope, for a number of reasons, clearly prefers that the 1962 and 1969 books be used in the same parish, though Summorum Pontificum does provide:

Art. 10. The ordinary of a particular place, if he feels it appropriate, may erect a personal parish in accordance with can. 518 for celebrations following the ancient form of the Roman rite, or appoint a chaplain, while observing all the norms of law.

Canon 518 provides:

Can. 518 As a general rule, a parish is to be territorial, that is, it is to embrace all Christ's faithful of a given territory. Where it is useful however, personal parishes are to be established, determined by reason of the rite, language or nationality of the faithful of a certain territory, or on some other basis.

Source: Code of Canon Law, Chapter VI : Parishes, Parish Priests and Assistant Priests.

A personal apostolic administration, by establishing a separate juridical body, apart from the diocese, implies that those adhering to the 1962 books either practice a different rite or form of the Catholic faith, or, for pastoral needs, are better served not by the local ordinary and diocesan staff, but by a separate, sympathetic and responsive ordinary and staff.

Gueranger has this to say about the parable of Solomon's wisdom:

The two women, who appear before Solomon, are another figure of the same truth. The child whom they both claim is the Gentile people, which has been brought to the knowledge of the true God. The Synagogue, typified by the woman who has caused death to her child, has misled the people confided to her care; and now unjustly claims one that does not belong to her. And whereas it is not from any motherly affection, but only from pride, that she puts forward such a claim, it matters little to her what becomes of the child, provided only he not be given to the true mother, the Church. Solomon, the king of peace, who is one of the Scriptural types of Christ, adjudges the child to her that has given him birth and nourished him; and the pretensions of the false mother are rejected. Let us, then, love our mother, the holy Church, the bride of Jesus. It is she that has made us children of God by Baptism. She has fed us with the Bread of life; she has given us the Holy Spirit; and, when we had the misfortune to relapse into death by sin, she, by the divine power given to her, has restored us to life. A filial love for the Church is the sign of the elect; obedience to her commandments is the mark of a soul in which God has set His Kingdom.