Wow. A 15-minute Photoshop job.Archbishop Heim, RIP.
Jesus, Mary, Joseph. What more do you need?
Knowing absolutely nothing of heraldry, and thus expecting nothing: I like it.
The symbols of the papacy have always been the tiara and crossed keys, and so it should remain.The mitre is a mistake, an aberration, and should be reserved for former popes who no longer hold the keys.
But...I don't see anything that says "Peter the Roman" on it?
I find myself agreeing with Petrus.
Funnily enough it was Benedict XVI who removed the tiara from the papal coat of arms.
Where is the papal pallium?
Looks like I could have made that in MS Paint! Tiara, keys, etc. aside, one can't go wrong with Jesus, Mary, and Joseph. It isn't at all pleasing to look at though.
Simplicity to the extreme might by considered a cartoon.
The pallium was added by Benedict; this is 'back to normal' so to speak, miter notwithstanding. Most popes have used their preexisting coats of arms, so this too is all pretty normal. I think Benedict set the new standard in removing the tiara from the personal coat of arms; it remains in the official symbols of the papacy, but not for the man. I would be surprised if any pope reverses that any time soon.
I like it too. It's very interesting. I have now put it on our parish website.Any advice on the font used in the motto?I am amused to note that the sunburst of the Jesuit Order is reminiscent of the 'Sun of May' in the Argentine and Uruguayan flag.:-)
It was announced on VIS today that the Holy Father's Coat of Arms has the Tiara.Papal Coat of Arms:The last topic that Fr. Lombardi covered was the now pontiff's papal coat of arms and motto. These are the same that he used as bishop. The shield has a bright blue background, at the centre top of which is a yellow radiant sun with the IHS christogram on it representing Jesus (it is also the Jesuit logo). The IHS monogram, as well as a cross that pierces the H, are in red with three black nails directly under them. Under that, to the left, is a star representing Mary, Mother of Christ and the Church. To the right of the star is a nard flower representing Joseph, Patron of the Universal Church. With these symbols the Pope demonstrates his love for the Holy Family.What distinguishes his coat of arms as pontiff is that, instead of the wide-brimmed, red cardinal's hat atop the shield, it is now crowned by the papal tiara and crossed keys.His motto—“miserando atque eligendo” (because he saw him through the eyes of mercy and chose him)—is taken from the Venerable Bede's homily on the Gospel account of the call of Matthew. It holds special meaning for the Pope because—when he was only 17-years-old, after going to confession on the Feast of St. Matthew in 1953—he perceived God's mercy in his life and felt the call to the priesthood, following the example of St. Ignatius of Loyola.
Yes, it is, you are absolutely right, it is NOT a coincidence that both the Sol de Mayo and the Jesuit Sun are almost exactly the same. And the colors are the national colors of the two nations bordering the River Plate.
1. The arms look bland and minimalistic to me, but that seems to fit Pope Francis's overall sensibility, and that's his call. Orbis Catholicus Secondus has some more beautiful alternatives posted, but they had tiaras and are, I'm sure, too baroque for the Holy Father. 2. As others have noted, I make allowances for the fact that the removal of the tiara was set by Benedict's precedent. It was hardly likely that his successor (perhaps not even had it been Ranjith) would have restored it.I think we have to face reality on the tiara: it's a pretension to worldly power that fits poorly in the Democratic Age. I'm not saying I agree with abandoning it; just that you could see this coming many decades ago: it would be harder and harder for the Papacy to resist abandoning it, after the world at large had abandoned the monarchism that had driven its creation in the first place. Especially after Paul VI's stripdown of the Papal Court and ceremonial (which, ironically, had the effect of reducing the number of lay positions at the Vatican).I could live with the loss of the tiara, and the austere, informal approach to daily papal life if we could still have the full panoply of liturgical and artistic beauty restored to pontifical Masses, vestments included. That was, after St. Francis's own approach: He lived in rags, but once he entered the sacristy, nothing was too precious for the glory of the Lord.
Much as I like the tiara, I do not wish to ever see it again on a coat of arms.Any king or worldly power can have a tiara.Only a man of God, a man consecrated to God has the mitre.Christ said - my kingdom is not of this world - and the mitre symbolises that perfectly.By the same token though - all truly liturgical vestures, including the fanon, the pontifical dalmatic, etc. need to be worn. Because they are liturgical and are not associated with worldly power but rather the spiritual worship of God.
It was not Pope Benedict who personally abandoned the use of tiara in the arms. It was an earlier approved recommendation written by Piero Marini, and Pope Benedict did along with it. Read: http://www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/2004/documents/ns_lit_doc_20040202_liturgia-bellezza_en.html#3.7.%20Papal%20insignia
The tiara symbolises much more, Justin, than temporal power. It was removed by Paul VI for the same reasons that we got a new teaching on religious liberty.
As someone with a "educated amateur" level of interest in heraldry, I think these are terribly ugly arms. Too many charges jumbled together on a plain blue field. It looks like a DIY job with too much access to a clipart gallery. It was not designed by someone who knows anything about heraldry. Surely there are better heraldic devices that represent Christ, Mary, and Joseph?Here's an idea: quaterly, blue and brown (for Mary and Joseph), with a white cross overall (for Christ)?
It's really ugly. It looks like the work of a child, 15 minutes of copy ad paste. The stylized nard flower looks like grapes. And where is the pallium?
Athelstane, Bl. Pope John Paul II made a point of saying that the papal tiara is not a matter of an earthly kingdom; his argument against wearing it was that it would appear as such.
So...not even one, single Franciscan reference? Perhaps people have been reading about St. Francis, the Saint and not St. Francis the invented liberal cartoon?
I was also wondering whether the seagull that sat atop the Sistine chimney for the hour ahead of the white smoke might have made an appearance.Y'know, Francis and all that.
Hidden One,Athelstane, Bl. Pope John Paul II made a point of saying that the papal tiara is not a matter of an earthly kingdom; his argument against wearing it was that it would appear as such.Which, when the rubber hits the pavement, amounts to the same thing, doesn't it?When Popes decided to stop wearing tiaras - beginning with Paul VI - it wasn't long before they'd fall out of the coat of arms.
"Only a man of God, a man consecrated to God has the mitre."Tell that to Katharine Jefforts Schori.
The absence of the triregnum, while only to be expected, irks me. I violently lost my temper with the Telegraph as they described 'the mitre and the cross keys' as the Papal insignia. No! No! The Papal Tiara! - the Papacy is an absolute monarchy, the highest monarch on Earth as God's Vicar [Accipe tiaram tribus coronis ornatam, et scias te esse patrem principum et regum, rectorem orbis in terra vicarium Salvatoris nostri Jesu Christi, cui est honor et gloria in saecula saeculorum] , in a proper monarchical 'system' all the Kings of Christendom, even the Emperor, owed allegiance to the Pope.It’s highly regrettable that the heraldic splendour of prelates’ coats of arms is in decline of late. It is not merely that fewer aristocrats are in the high clergy – Pope St. Pius X was a postman’s son – but the principles of heraldry, and indeed the aristocratic manner, dress and bearing of prelates is sadly in abeyance (Vatican II and the so-called ‘noble simplicity’ I expect). One need only compare the splendour of the Papal Court here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2Ia4F4_kg8 (remarkably after Vatican II, before, I expect, the deplorable ‘Ut Sive Sollicite’) with the lamentably denuded ceremonial of the Papal court today.I don’t think I’m unduly concerning myself - ‘Lex orandi…lex vivendi’. Modernism must denude the Church. That’s how they think - The ritual of the Papal Court imposed a certain orthodoxy, a certain reverence, a certain authority, the certainty of the splendour of the One Holy Church, of God’s Vicar on Earth, that the Modernists and ecumenicists could not stand.
I am glad the tiara is gone. It looked like a missle. Its an old symbol that is no longer meaningful. Perhaps we have undervalued the mitre as a symbol of authority. (keep the keys though)!
Chad wrote that at VIS it was announced that the Papal heraldrics would contain the tiara.Meanwhile, this must have been changed, for it now reads:"What distinguishes his coat of arms as pontiff is that, instead of the wide-brimmed, red cardinal's hat atop the shield, it is now bears the same symbols of papal dignity as that of Benedict XVI: the papal mitre and crossed silver and gold keys joined by a red cord." (emphasis mine)Source: http://visnews-en.blogspot.com/2013/03/tomorrow-mass-of-inauguration-of-bishop.html (in fine)
He included two knots. Mary Untier of Knots - one of his favourites. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Untier_of_Knots
Sorry for 2 in a row - he took his old coat of arms, removed a few things, added the knots and a few other things, replaced the bishop's cross below the cardinal's hat with a mitre having an emblem resembling the papal cross (papal cross minus the top and bottom vertical parts.)
At Stephen Korsmann, two questions please;1. Where are the two knots you refer to? I can't quite see them. The only knots I see seem to be indicative of the knots on a priest's girdle2. How do you know that Pope Francis is a devotee of Mary Undoer of Knots.Thanks for sharing.
I haven't had the time to watch Farther Lombardi's press conference today, so I can't attest to the authenticity of the information, but a reader of Fr. Zuhlsdorf's blog posted there a summary of what was said about the Liturgy for the beginning of the ministry of the Bishop of Rome.It seems that additional changes were decided by Pope Francis. Perhaps that's the reason why the booklet for the Mass is not avaliable yet in the Vatican website. Anyway, the reader provides information also about the Ring of the Fisherman. Pope Francis will wear a simple silver ring that belonged to the personal secretary to Pope Paul VI. This last information I confirmed with a google search.Anyway, here is this reader's summary:"Cardinal Jean-Louis Tauran will present Francis with the pallium — he’s the one who declared, “Habemus papam!” And the pope’s Ring of the Fisherman will be presented by Cardinal Angelo Sodano. What kind of ring? Sort of a hand-me-down. The ring belonged to Pope Paul VI’s personal secretary, Archbishop Pasquale Macchi — and it won’t be solid gold, but gold-plated silver.You’ll hear the regular readings for Tuesday, the Feast of St. Joseph — not the readings that go with the Mass for a papal inauguration. The first will be in English; the second Spanish. And the Gospel will be chanted only in Greek — not both Greek and Latin, as is customary. The pope will preach only in Italian, as he did when he met with journalists on Saturday and when he gave his Angelus address yesterday….You won’t see an offeratory procession. You will hear prayers of the faithful for government leaders — and of course for the poor. Nor will the pope distribute Communion (hundreds of deacons and priests will handle that).The idea, Vatican spokesmen explained, is to keep the Mass as short as possible."
The Ring of the Fisherman won't have the image of blessed Peter in the act of fishing (casting a net at the see). Instead it will bear the image of a bearded St. Peter holding the keyes.The Pauline-era ring belonged to Archbishop Macchi, Secretary to Pope Paul the Worst, then it belonged to another priest, and then to Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, who gave it to Pope Francis.
After a Google search, I can report that the information regarding the changes to the Inauguration Mass have also been confirmed.The ordo approved by Pope Benedict XVI on 20 April 2005 and revised by Pope Benedict XVI in February 2013 will be partly set aside.Instead of the readings proper to the inauguration Mass (there are several options in the liturgical book "Ordo rituum pro ministerii Petrini initio Romae episcopi", but none will be used), Pope Francis has decided that the Mass will be recited with the readings of the day (solemnity of St. Joseph).Also, the longstanding Papal custom of double proclamation of the Gospel in Latin and Greek in the most important Masses will be scrapped. The Gospel will be sung in Greek only. Also, the Novus Ordo offertory procession will be omitted.In what appears to be the Most relevant change now adopted, Pope Francis DECIDED REVERT BENEDICT XVI'S DECISION THAT ALL CARDINALS WOULD TAKE PART IN THE ACT OF OBEDIENCE.Instead, according to the Vatican Information Service (http://www.news.va/en/news/tomorrow-mass-of-inauguration-of-bishop-of-romes-p), only two Cardinals from each Order will make the act of homage.
The booklet for tomorrow's Holy Mass is here http://www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/libretti/2013/20130319_inizio-ministero-petrino.pdf
I'm also OK with the Mitre replacing the Tiara. The Tiara is a symbol of temporal monarchy and all the corruption in the church that came along with that innovation. The Pope should be concerned with leading us into the Kingdom of the next world, not in administrating the kingdoms of this world. The Mitre is his spiritual crown as the visible head of the Church and that is how it should stay.I for one am happy to see the papacy shed the trappings of temporal concerns. The glory of the pope should be on display in the Mass (which should NOT be toned down!) and as a teacher, not as a temporal monarch.
It really aint that bad guys.You want a bland coat of arms? Check out Cardinal Ottaviani's. Three dots.
It seems that additional changes were decided by Pope Francis.Perhaps such as:" The “Obedience”:Six cardinals, two from each order, among the first of those present approach the Pope to make an act of obedience. Note that all the Cardinal electors already made an act of obedience in the Sistine Chapel at the end of the Conclave and that all the cardinals were able to meet the Pope in the following day’s audience in the Clementine Hall."If the reports from a few weeks ago were correct, this appears to include undoing Benedict XVI's mandate to return to requiring all of the cardinals to manifest their Obedience at the Installation.
Those who think that the tiara is a temporal symbol should take time to read the inauguration homily of John Paul II:4. In past centuries, when the Successor of Peter took possession of his See, the triregnum or tiara was placed on his head. The last Pope to be crowned was Paul VI in 1963, but after the solemn coronation ceremony he never used the tiara again and left his Successors free to decide in this regard.Pope John Paul I, whose memory is so vivid in our hearts, did not wish to have the tiara; nor does his Successor wish it today. This is not the time to return to a ceremony and an object considered, wrongly, to be a symbol of the temporal power of the Popes.(...)And he went on to say:"Our time calls us, urges us, obliges us to gaze on the Lord and immerse ourselves in humble and devout meditation on the mystery of the supreme power of Christ himself.He who was born of the Virgin Mary, the carpenter's Son (as he was thought to be), the Son of the living God (confessed by Peter), came to make us all "a kingdom of priests".The Second Vatican Council has reminded us of the mystery of this power and of the fact that Christ's mission as Priest, Prophet-Teacher and King continues in the Church. Everyone, the whole People of God, shares in this threefold mission. Perhaps in the past, the tiara, this triple crown, was placed on the Pope's head in order to express by that symbol the Lord's plan for his Church, namely that all the hierarchical order of Christ's Church, all "sacred power" exercised in the Church, is nothing other than service, service with a single purpose: to ensure that the whole People of God shares in this threefold mission of Christ and always remains under the power of the Lord; a power that has its source not in the powers of this world but in the mystery of the Cross and Resurrection. The absolute and yet sweet and gentle power of the Lord responds to the whole depths of the human person, to his loftiest aspirations of intellect, will and heart. It does not speak the language of force but expresses itself in charity and truth.The new Successor of Peter in the See of Rome, today makes a fervent, humble and trusting prayer: Christ, make me become and remain the servant of your unique power, the servant of your sweet power, the servant of your power that knows no eventide. Make me be a servant. Indeed, the servant of your servants."
Interestingly, I saw THIS image of the papal coat of arms that does include the tiarahttps://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/230029_453739758028414_130366461_n.jpg
Athestane, people often say "the world at large had abandoned monarchism". Is it really true? I'd have to research this but my hunch would be that democracies are far outnumbered by other forms of government.
"The Pauline-era ring belonged to Archbishop Macchi, Secretary to Pope Paul the Worst"...such love and respect shown to a past Pope that has been declared Venerable by the Church, a Pope who proclaimed Humanae Vitae (sorry if I spelled it incorrectly) and who imposed terrible penitential practices on himself (like wearing a hair shirt) for the good of the Church...I just don't some of you who post such hateful comments..God have mercy on us
A propos of the seagull. It looked to me suspiciously like the seagull that attacked and almost killed Pope Benedict's peace dove a few weeks earlier.
"Any king or worldly power can have a tiara."Wrong. Only the pope can have a tiara, for he alone reigns in the threefold manner symbolised by the tiara."The Tiara is a symbol of temporal monarchy and all the corruption in the church that came along with that innovation."No, the pope's right to temporal authority, which St. Peter and the Church received from Jesus and is therefore no innocation, is only one of three things symbolised by the tiara.Nor is the corruption that sometimes accompanied the popes' temporal and ecclesiastical authority symbolised by the tiara. That is what enemies of the Church think the tiara means. Catholics must never substitute anti-Catholic insults for the actual meanings of the Church's symbolic imagery.Please note that although the tiara is not in the coat of arms of Pope Francis, nor of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, nor have popes worn a tiara since the reign of Paul VI, nevertheless it remains the heraldic blazon of Vatican City, of which Pope Francis is the temporal absolute monarch. Also, the image of St. Peter in the Vatican is annually crowned with a papal tiara on the Feast of the Chair of St. Peter. The Church has not abandoned or suppressed the tiara altogether, nor can she ever reject the doctrine which it represents. The popes no longer exercise their temporal authority in the same way as they have in the past, but that doesn't mean they no longer have the divine right to temporal authority that they have always had.
I don't want to sound uncharitable, but it's childish, it looks like it was a cut-and-paste job done on a laptop. Bad enough the tiara had to be removed--reportedly Benedict regretted that (and it did reappear on one of the gonfalons)--but the shield itself has no redeeming qualities. It is clear Papa Francesco has no refined aesthetic sense, which most most Jesuits lack. Let us hope--and pray!--that what he lacks in liturgical and ceremonial form he makes up in proclaiming the Gospel, but I am not too confident. I fear we are in for a retread of Paul VI's dour papacy.
The following is revealing (from whispersintheloggia.blogspot.com):"This afternoon, the Holy See formally rolled out Pope Francis' coat of arms – a design that, yet again, adapts the papacy to its new occupant, not the other way around."
Re Biden, Pelosi, et al attending installation Mass.One can only hope that Communion for them be denied for their continuing support for abortion.I hope that Francis will not hide behind the multiplicity of Communion servers; and instead announce that pro-choice Catholics should remain seated.A dream I suppose, but the right thing to do.
It appears as if the mozzetta may be back! One was rush ordered today: http://honresp-catholicblog.blogspot.com/2013/03/tomorrows-papal-mass-good-news-from.html
Will he actually genuflect at the Consecration tomorrow, or will he just bow again?Maybe that's just one more thing in need of simplification?After all his "walkabouts," and the images of him kneeling in prayer, I've concluded there probably isn't anything wrong with his knees that would prevent him from following the rubrics. Must be something else?
How beautiful. At a time when Catholic family life is more informed by secular family issues than bears witness to the world, a humble witness to the holiness of family life. In addition the three persons of the Holy Family are visible signs of the Most Holy Trinity as so masterfully rendered by Esteban Murillo in his "Heavenly and Earthly Trinity". The Ignatian IHS and sunburst a remarkably bold witness to the Christocentrism of Franciscan spirituality as well as the retention of his episcopal motto, "Lowly yet chosen" a testament to the humility of Il Poverello. Wonderful.
MattJ, good news if true! I went to the link and the author says it would be worn for the obedience of the cardinals; but in the recent past, hasn't that been done with the Holy Father in his Mass vestments?He'll be receiving the Heads of State in St. Peter's immediately after the Mass, so I'd almost expect him to wear the mozzetta (and stole?) for that instead.
Had it not been identified as a nard flower, I would have sworn it was a bunch of grapes.The Pope can bear for his arms anything he wishes, just as he determines what is proper papal vesture.None of these things were delivered on tablets of stone from Mt. Sinai.
"I've concluded there probably isn't anything wrong with his knees that would prevent him from following the rubrics. "Fortunately we couldn't care less about your foolish conclusions.
Apostolus, I've simply been wondering we he does not genuflect at the consecration of the Host and Chalice. I myself thought initially (and even wrote here) that it may be due to a health condition, but since it appears that he gets around and kneels for prayer quite well, it doesn't seem to be the case. Why is that foolish?I would think that the readers of a certain other blog would be wondering why the Holy Father isn't "doing the Red."
What is always forgotten is that the tiara is the oldest element of the Pope's dress. In fact it is a pre-cristian headdress reserved for priests, and had been associated always with the High Priest of the Temple of Jerusalem. It was also used by pagans, and not only priests, but the association to priesthood was its principal element.The tiara - in its original form, a white linen cone without the three crowns - was used by the Pope certainly long before the VII c., and probably well before Constantine.The present tiara is commonly believed to be a copy of the Imperial crown, but this is a gross mistake: the Imperial crown, called the diadem, of which there are many representations, was a circlet studded with pearls and gems, and was used by the Byzantine Emperors until the downfall of the eastern Empire. A good example is the Iron Crown in Monza, the Imperial Crown in Vienna has an arch added to the diadem due to a misreading of the combination of Imperial crown and helm on his coins.All the rest of the Pope's dress - the dalmatic, the manipule, the pallium, the sandals, the white and red consular colours (the only colours the Pope used in dress and vestments until Paul VI) - are simply the court uniform of the Roman Imperial court belonging to the rank of Imperial dignitary (the rank of Illustris, and Gloriosissimus for the Pope in particular) granted by the Emperor Constantine to the Christian bishops in 313, when he included them in the Imperial court. The casula, later developed in the chasuble, is of course the formal dress of lay people of rank of the period (the toga was a gala dress seldom used even by the first century), and it was not to be used by common people, workers and slaves.So the only religious element of the Pope's dress is the tiara, all the rest being an Imperial court uniform. All the religious meanings attached to these vestments are of course medieval.The mitre came in much later, around the X c. and originaly was an emblem of the temporal jurisdiction of the bishop.Unfortunately, only the three crowns are noticed in the tiara, and not the tiara in itself, and the crowns are taken for emblems of temporal power. It was never so, this was attributed to the tiara by its adversaries.Why not go back to the origianl white tiara, without the crowns? By the abolition of the tiara, the only really religious element and the most ancient, going back to the Temple, has been abolished.Heraldicaly, the abolition of the tiara is a grave mistake - or is it?A coat of arms is a visual representation of a juridical reality.The tiara combined with the keyes are the emblem of the Pope; the keyes alone are not. In fact they can have different meanings, one of the most common being that of Great Chamberlain to a King: this dignitary would combine the keyes of his office (originaly it was the common key that opened all the doors of the Royal papalce) with his coat of arms.With the Reformation, Protestant bishps sought to differentiate their arms fro the Catholic bishops, and adopted the mitre instead of the pontifical hat.So Pope Benedict and Francis's coats of arms are, heraldicaly, the coat of arms of a Protestant bishop, Great Chamberlain to some king. As I cannot believe that this is simply due to incompetence, I can only surmise that the nature of the Pontificate is changed and that this is expressed in the new arms: non longer they speak of themselves as Popes, but only as bishops of Rome, certainly more important than other bishpos, but nevertheless simply bishops. So, no more Pope, according to the arms: just the president of the episcopal Vatican II republic.
Seeing with which difficulty our holy father ascended/descended steps today, I will give him the benefit of a doubt on the whole genuflection issue. Has anyone seen him kneeling except for a somewhat comfortotable prie-dieux? Even when he did that today Msgr. Marini rushed to his side when he was about to rise.
Just noting a few observations:After the Consecration of the Host, as best I could tell from the camera angle, he neither bowed nor genuflected.After the Consecration of the Chalice, he genuflected.While greeting the Heads of State in St. Peter's after Mass, he did not wear the mozzetta, only his white cassock.
Is it conventional for the papal coat of arms to include a motto?I thought not (but maybe this varies in accordance with the context of its use: personal arms versus official).Can anyone advise me on this point, and ought 'Miserando atque eligendo' appear, at least in accordance with traditional heraldic precepts?
The adoption of the motto is a relatively modern usage, but there is nothing irregular in this.There is no difference between personal and official arms. Arms are at the same time personal and official, they express both the identity of the person and his rank, titles, etc. In some cases, especially with Sovereigns who have very complicated arms, there is a difference between tha complete, great arms and the reduced version of the same. But the principal elements are and must be the same.In some cases, as with the arms of some official, the family arms are joined to the arms of the institution he represents durante munere. The difference between personal vs official Papal arms is really a meaningless verbal sophistry, used to introduce the change in the arms.
I did not see Cardinal Sodano kneeling/bowing/kissing the Fisherman's Ring after presenting it to Holy Father, Pope Francis. What does one make of it, considering what one hears of the Vatican inside happenings.Gemma
Regarding the Petrus Romanus isssue:guess what is the real name of St Francis: Giovanni di PIETRO di Bernardone,
st francis real name Giovanni di Pietro di Bernardone,
Messa in Latino has updated their entry saying that they can directly confirm the delivery of the mozzetta on Monday evening, even though it was not worn today.
Post a Comment