Today's NYT has one of those only-in-New York-pieces glorifying the excess of (some) examples of the "bris" ceremony (and reception).

As referenced in the piece, the bris is traditionally done on the eighth day after birth (Genesis 17:12). But some people apparently are motivated to modify the tradition a little:

Rabbi Adam Mintz, who describes his congregation of 900 families at the Lincoln Square Synagogue on the Upper West Side as "modern Orthodox" and is president of the New York Board of Rabbis, said he doesn't think the world will end if a bris is postponed for the sake of the party. "Any mohel will tell you Sunday is the most popular day, and even among the Orthodox, people are choosing the date that's most popular," he said. "We have an in-house caterer, so 90 percent have it at the synagogue and 10 percent have it at home."
(Emphasis added.)

I assume that Rabbi Mintz was either misquoted or that the reporter misunderstood the import of his statement. From a halakhic standpoint, the only reason an Orthodox family could properly postpone the bris past the eighth day would be due to the baby's health concerns or the like - not merely for the sake of a party! (Priorities, anyone?)

I have a feeling that Rabbi Mintz has already lodged a complaint to Mr. Okrent or another editor at the Times, or he's getting an earful from his congregants as we blog.

(As an aside, the prior paragraph in the piece notes that some people - not necessarily Orthodox - prefer to postpone the bris for the sake of convenience, but then quotes a caterering manager giving examples of people who do the actual bris on the eighth day but have a reception at a more convenient time. That is much less problematic even from an Orthodox standpoint.)

UPDATE: Well, I was right. Rabbi Mintz has apparently circulated an e-mail, which is reproduced on Protocols. In the interests of publicizing the clarification, I will do the same:

I wanted to take this opportunity to apologize for the implications of my quote in the New York Times this morning. As you have probably guessed, as part of a longer interview, Alex Witchell asked me why Sunday has become a popular day for brises even among the Orthodox. I proceeded to explain to her when we allow for the delay of brises and the fact that the custom has developed, at least in certain circles in America, to be more flexible when rescheduling a delayed bris. Therefore, Sunday is often the day in which these brises take place.
I called Ms. Witchell and asked that a correction be printed in the New York Times. She explained to me that this was not "correction material" as there was no fact that was incorrect, only an impression that was created by the article.
I argued but did not convince her.
In the end, I am confident that Jews will not draw this unfortunate conclusion from the article and that both rabbonim and mohalim who advice parents on the timing of the bris will explain the misrepresentation of my quote.
May the spirit of ve-nahafoch hu transform this unfortunate episode into an important lesson for us all.
A freilechen Purim

Adam Mintz

(Emphasis added.)

So Rabbi Mintz's statement only referred to flexibility in rescheduling a bris when a delay had already been necessary for other reasons - not simply a matter of picking a more convenient time for a party. That's a much more accurate statement.

ANOTHER UPDATE: The Times has issued a correction:

An article last Wednesday about the growing trend among American Jews to celebrate the circumcision ritual of the bris outside the home or synagogue and with increasing elaborateness included a quotation from Rabbi Adam Mintz of the Lincoln Square Synagogue in Manhattan that referred imprecisely to his attitude about the timing of the rite, ordinarily carried out eight days after birth. He says that in remarking, "Sunday is the most popular day, and even among the Orthodox, people are choosing the date that's most popular," he did not intend to suggest that a bris could be postponed for the sake of holding a party at a convenient time — but rather that if it had to be delayed on justifiable grounds, there might then be flexibility in scheduling.