P
PA650
Guest
Perhaps it’s too triumphalist? Or a line of thought similar to what Monsignor Eugenio Pacelli (later Pope Pius XII) warned of:
- Status
J
JReducation
Guest
I don’t foresee Pope Benedict wearing it; but who knows? 
Life is full of surprises.
The reason that I don’t foresee him wearing it is because he took it out of the coat of arms and he also laid aside the title, Patriarch of the West.
Looking at the picture, it is an elaborate work of art. It is much nicer than that of Pope Paul VI. I saw that one every day for eight years while I was a student at Catholic University of America, where it now resides. It’s not as nice looking in real time as it is in pictures. It look like a nuke with three gold rings. I don’t know who designed it, but it was very blah. This one has more detail to it.
I also think that the world has become accustomed to a less imposing papacy, one that maintains elegance and at the same time projects simplicity. I read in Light of the World where Pope Benedict was asked about the time that he wore the camauro and another time he wore the saturno. He said that he had put them on because there was nothing else handy and he is very sensitive to hot and cold. He quickly added that he would never wear them again, because they were no longer culturally appropriate. Pope Benedict is very much the scholar. He will look at this as he does everything else, from a rational perspective. He will decide what to do with it based on what is logical, not what is traditional. That’s not the way that his mind works.
If you look at his Coat of Arms , he put in the mitre in place of the tiara, but kept the the three horizontal bars that are carried over from the three rings on the tiara. From a purely intellectual perspective, this design makes sense. He is a bishop and the Pontiff. The mitre is the official sign of the bishop and the three crowns the sign of the Pontiff.
We need to learn to think as he does, if we’re going to try to guess what he’s going to do.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
Life is full of surprises.The reason that I don’t foresee him wearing it is because he took it out of the coat of arms and he also laid aside the title, Patriarch of the West.
Looking at the picture, it is an elaborate work of art. It is much nicer than that of Pope Paul VI. I saw that one every day for eight years while I was a student at Catholic University of America, where it now resides. It’s not as nice looking in real time as it is in pictures. It look like a nuke with three gold rings. I don’t know who designed it, but it was very blah. This one has more detail to it.
I also think that the world has become accustomed to a less imposing papacy, one that maintains elegance and at the same time projects simplicity. I read in Light of the World where Pope Benedict was asked about the time that he wore the camauro and another time he wore the saturno. He said that he had put them on because there was nothing else handy and he is very sensitive to hot and cold. He quickly added that he would never wear them again, because they were no longer culturally appropriate. Pope Benedict is very much the scholar. He will look at this as he does everything else, from a rational perspective. He will decide what to do with it based on what is logical, not what is traditional. That’s not the way that his mind works.
If you look at his Coat of Arms , he put in the mitre in place of the tiara, but kept the the three horizontal bars that are carried over from the three rings on the tiara. From a purely intellectual perspective, this design makes sense. He is a bishop and the Pontiff. The mitre is the official sign of the bishop and the three crowns the sign of the Pontiff.
We need to learn to think as he does, if we’re going to try to guess what he’s going to do.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
L
Little_One0307
Guest
I had wondered where the old tiara went to. I watched the Paul VI movie that Ignatius Press made and it showed him wearing the tiara.
L
Little_One0307
Guest
Hats off to that, I think the should wear it, and if he does he will have my full support. The symbolism behind the tiara is beautiful and I think it would be wonderful to go back to that tradition.
That is beautiful. And I think it is a beautiful sign of unity or one that is in the making.
Little One0307
That is beautiful. And I think it is a beautiful sign of unity or one that is in the making.
Little One0307
J
JReducation
Guest
Which tiara are you talking about? Pope Paul’s tiara is in Washington, DC. He donated it to raise money for the Missionaries of Charity. It is on display on the lower level of the Basilica of the Immaculate Conception next to a very strange statue of Bl. Mother Teresa. From what I saw during my years as a student there, it brings in hundred of thousands of dollars a year. People donate to the Missionaries at the display case.
I believe that it was in 1969 that Pope Paul wrote that the tiara would no longer be worn during his papacy. Pope John Paul I and the succeeding popes have wanted to honor Pope Paul’s vision and have dropped its use. Pope John Paul I actually made a statement to the fact when he was asked what he wanted for his coronation. He said that he did not want a coronation, in honor of Pope Paul’s vision. He created the installation ceremony, which was kept alive by Bl. John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI.
This has nothing to do with the tiara, but it’s along the same line of thinking. Bl. John Paul II wanted to do something to raise money for the Missionaries of Charity. He donated the papal limousine, which has never been used again and his personal car as well.
For the critics, there has been a unified effort on the part of the recent popes to support the poor using Vatican resources and their personal resources.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
C
ClamDigger
Guest
You mean in the past forty-fifty years or so?
A
Alfonsus
Guest
The “crown” in Byzantine rite is mitre in Latin rite and used by all bishops.
So the Latin church does keep it own tradition by having mitre instead of crown.
I
InquisitorMax
Guest
I think he should wear it. It sends an assertive message. He should wear it because it will upset the sort of people who very much want the Catholic Church to deny Her past, Her Mission and Her Doctrines.
I think the fad for trying to altering our doctrines and our disciplines to try to please people who will never convert, or who wish to apostasise while remaining nominally Catholic, is dying out and it is good that it is so.
[sarcasm]Imagine, the Pope, the successor to Peter, Christ’s Vicar on Earth, head of the Vatican State, daring to wear a traditional crown. It will have a terrible effect on dialoguing for peace and social justice![/sarcasm]
I think the fad for trying to altering our doctrines and our disciplines to try to please people who will never convert, or who wish to apostasise while remaining nominally Catholic, is dying out and it is good that it is so.
[sarcasm]Imagine, the Pope, the successor to Peter, Christ’s Vicar on Earth, head of the Vatican State, daring to wear a traditional crown. It will have a terrible effect on dialoguing for peace and social justice![/sarcasm]
J
JReducation
Guest
You have to think as Pope Benedict thinks to understand how he sees this. You’re thinking of the external and traditional reasons for wearing it. Pope Benedict would analyze the academic reasons. He’s an academician and he is determined to lead Catholics down the path of an academic approach to faith, which is very deep, because it’s that dialogue between faith and reason. Faith influences reason, not the other way around. Unless the tiara is a symbol of faith, he will not wear it.
I don’t know that he will or not. But I do know that if you want him to wear it, you must show him how it’s a part of faith, not just a custom. Pope Benedict is not big on customs. He never was, even as Fr. Ratzinger, later Dr. Ratzinger and then Cardinal Ratzinger. His basic approach is, “This is the logical thing to do, because it is revealed through faith.” I heard many of his talks when I was a young student in Rome and that’s his theology. He’s a blend of Franciscan and Augustinian. Both schools stress the heart (experience) informing the intellect (knowledge).
Our reasoning tends to be too Thomistic for him. Pope Benedict rarely approaches things using that method. There’s nothing wrong with it. It’s just not him. Bl. John Paul II would have done that. I would not want him to do anything that does not come naturally to him. One of the qualities that make these last few popes such holy men is their simplicity. They were truly themselves in all things. They did not try to be like a previous pope or some other person.
Pope Benedict has said it many times to the Catholic world. He is who he is and if we don’t like it, we can blame the cardinals for electing him. He actually made this statement in public. He was rather offended when he was asked about following in the footsteps of John Paul II, Pius XII, Pius X and some other illustrious popes. He was not offended because they were bad role models. He likes them very much. He was offended that he was asked if he would try to be more like any of them. That was his answer, “I am who I am and I can’t be someone else. Those who are unhappy will have to blame the cardinals.”
He’s a gentleman. He will accept this gift with good graces. However, he’s also a scholar, very conscious of cultures, a historian, and very simple.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
J
JKirkLVNV
Guest
How very true! This preoccupation in the “traditional” fora with outward trappings is alarming. Those things ARE a part of our culture, but they are non-essentials and can be stumbling blocks for some on the way to the essentials. Insisting on Latin, insisting on the papal tiara, etc., for example, are an insistence on non-essentials.
T
Te_Deum
Guest
Latin is not a non-essential. We belong to the Latin Church. It’s absolutely integral to our heritage and our liturgy.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
But I (for one) didn’t see people ‘insisting on Latin, insisting on the papal tiara.’
Strangely enough what I saw was people insisting that ‘such things’ (as the tiara) were excessive, inappropriate, ungodly, and should be downright SOLD and the money given to the poor. The ‘insistance’ IOW is all from the other side, so to speak. Apparently these non-essentials anger them.
J
JKirkLVNV
Guest
Not so. Latin was not handed down as Divine Revelation in either Scripture or Tradition. It is a tool, a vehicle, but nothing more.
We cannot remove bread as the proper matter and substitute something else for the confection of the Holy Sacrifice. We CAN remove Latin (and I’m not saying we should or must) and still confect the Holy Sacrifice. The Catholic Church will be the Catholic Church whether we have Latin or not, whether the Holy Father uses the triregnum or not (the Church and the papacy predate it), whether there are six candles on the altar or four.
J
JKirkLVNV
Guest
I can’t speak for anyone else, but: this isn’t the only thread on the triregnum, you can search for numerous others. There has been, in the past, a strident insistence on the use of the tiara, as well as other things that are a part of our cultural past (and may again be a part of our cultural present), but which not are essentials. I find myself bemused and irritated by that strident insistence BECAUSE it has nothing to do with what is essential to the Catholic faith. I understand that the desire for these things is a reaction to all manner of misguided experimentation during the past 50 years (polyester chasubles, felt banners, strummed guitars at Mass, etc.), but I think those desires (as frequently expressed in these fora) could potentially become dangerous if what is passing and temporal becomes confused with what is essential and immutable. It’s like the Papal States: they don’t exist and we all need to get over it. Their non-existence, however, has nothing to do with the Pope or his authority or the truth of Catholicism (the one Truth).
I don’t feel that the Holy Father should again take up the triple crown, but if he does, well, he does. It is not any more necessary for him to do so than it is necessary for him to refrain from doing so.
J
JKirkLVNV
Guest
Post Script:
I’m not among those who would say “sell it and give the money to the poor.” We can do beautiful things for the honor and glory of God, as Mary annointed the feet of the Holy One with the costly spikenard and was praised by Him for doing so, and STILL take care of the poor. The “sell it for the poor” train of thought would lead us to get shed of the Pieta and other cultural and historical treasures of the Church (held in trust for the Church and all humanity and insured for 1 Euro each, btw).
I’m not among those who would say “sell it and give the money to the poor.” We can do beautiful things for the honor and glory of God, as Mary annointed the feet of the Holy One with the costly spikenard and was praised by Him for doing so, and STILL take care of the poor. The “sell it for the poor” train of thought would lead us to get shed of the Pieta and other cultural and historical treasures of the Church (held in trust for the Church and all humanity and insured for 1 Euro each, btw).
I
InquisitorMax
Guest
It’s the trapping that impress. You can’t see holiness if you walk into a church. You can see the decoration, the vestments, hear the mysterious language, the unearthly singing.
You know you’re not in Kansas any more.
I can’t bear the 'You don’t really need this" attitude. You can have a Mass on the hood of a jeep and by gum, if liberals and liberalism weren’t dying out, that’s what you darn well would have in most Catholic churches today.
The God Of All Creation presented with the least we can manage. What madness.
You know you’re not in Kansas any more.
I can’t bear the 'You don’t really need this" attitude. You can have a Mass on the hood of a jeep and by gum, if liberals and liberalism weren’t dying out, that’s what you darn well would have in most Catholic churches today.
The God Of All Creation presented with the least we can manage. What madness.
J
JKirkLVNV
Guest
That’s not the attitude expressed here. It’s not a question of “you don’t really need this.” It’s a question of absolutely insisting on having it and insisting that IT is a constituent element of Catholicism and the Faith will be altered without it. The Faith won’t be altered in the absence of the Triregnum. That was the point. It histrionic to say otherwise.
And holiness CAN be recognized without the trappings. It regularly is.
J
JReducation
Guest
That is not exactly what the Church says about any of the liturgical languages spoken in the different Churches. In fact, some of the Eastern Churches have introduced the vernacular as an option. The traditional language of each Church is to be given a place of honor. That’s what the Church has said. We have to separate the essential from the accidental. Language is accidental, even when it’s an important part of a tradition.
I believe that there is an undo intrusion on the part of the faithful in matters that do not pertain to us. What the pope wears is certainly one of them or how the pope is installed.
We have to learn to accept people as they are. If Pope Benedict or any pope says that this is not his style, then we should let it rest at that. To insist that he adopt a style or an image with which he is uncomfortable or as Pope Benedict has said, that he sees as non intellectual can be dangerous. It’s too easy to step on the toes of the person at the top. This is what happened when people reacted to the lifting of the excommunication of the SSPX bishops. They crossed a fine line and Pope Benedict called everyone on it. You don’t tell the pope what to do and you don’t get angry at the pope because he does what you don’t want him to do or does not do what you want him to do. That’s making him a scapegoat and if we’re not attentive to our own motives and our manner of expressing ourselves, it can come across as arrogance. The peasant does not dictate to the king sort of thing.
Let the pope do with this what he wants and let’s be very positive about the fact that Catholics and Orthodox have shown a great sign of respect for the Pontiff and a sign of affection. This is a rare thing when the two unite in such an act. That’s more important than whether or not he wears it. I’m sure that those who gave him the gift would like to see him wear it, but are also reasonable enough to know that it may never happen, because Pope Benedict is not the kind of man that is easily swayed once he has made up his mind about something. What I’m saying is that they knew it was a long shot going into this.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
C
ClamDigger
Guest
I think he was pointing more toward this one:
“Then one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, he that was about to betray him, said: Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor?” --John 12.4-5
We also don’t have a tradition of telling the pope (or anyone else) what to do with gifts that individuals give him. “But* I wouldn’t keep a piece of jewelry that someone crafted for me as a gift! * I would sell it and give the proceeds to the poor! So you should do the same!” How does that work?
L
Little_One0307
Guest
Thanks for posting that. I did not have time to look some stuff up. I just only wondered because of Paul VI movie that I watched. That solves the mystery.Which tiara are you talking about? Pope Paul’s tiara is in Washington, DC. He donated it to raise money for the Missionaries of Charity. It is on display on the lower level of the Basilica of the Immaculate Conception next to a very strange statue of Bl. Mother Teresa. From what I saw during my years as a student there, it brings in hundred of thousands of dollars a year. People donate to the Missionaries at the display case.
I believe that it was in 1969 that Pope Paul wrote that the tiara would no longer be worn during his papacy. Pope John Paul I and the succeeding popes have wanted to honor Pope Paul’s vision and have dropped its use. Pope John Paul I actually made a statement to the fact when he was asked what he wanted for his coronation. He said that he did not want a coronation, in honor of Pope Paul’s vision. He created the installation ceremony, which was kept alive by Bl. John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI.
This has nothing to do with the tiara, but it’s along the same line of thinking. Bl. John Paul II wanted to do something to raise money for the Missionaries of Charity. He donated the papal limousine, which has never been used again and his personal car as well.
For the critics, there has been a unified effort on the part of the recent popes to support the poor using Vatican resources and their personal resources.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
Have a good one and God bless. Thanks for taking the time to post that.
Little One0307
- Status