Red mozzetta? Coat of Arms?

  • Thread starter Thread starter R_C
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’d be surprised if he actually said this. Not because he might not care for the Mozzetta, but because this kind of a remark would be incredibly disparaging of not only his predecessors (particularly his immediate predecessor), but all of Vatican tradition.

I’m almost wondering whether (assuming he actually said this) the “carnival” he was talking about is the pre-lentan celebration in South American countries…and that foregoing the Mozzetta was an act of lenten simplicity. It would at least make more sense than such a harsh comment.
This is actually the best explanation yet - of all the made up explanations we’ve gone through so far.
 
I wonder if Pope Francis didn’t wear the mozzetta because his simar had the pelligrina (should cape) attached. I can’t recall what Benedict wore exactly at his first appearance on the loggia, but I know most bishops have a simar or cassock without the pelligrina, for the sheer fact that it’s so difficult to fit the mozetta over it.

Just an idea.
 
I wonder if Pope Francis didn’t wear the mozzetta because his simar had the pelligrina (should cape) attached. I can’t recall what Benedict wore exactly at his first appearance on the loggia, but I know most bishops have a simar or cassock without the pelligrina, for the sheer fact that it’s so difficult to fit the mozetta over it.

Just an idea.
Well none of the white cassocks fit him.

He wore a white alb, over his black sweater, red cape and the mozzetta.
 
I wonder if Pope Francis didn’t wear the mozzetta because his simar had the pelligrina (should cape) attached. I can’t recall what Benedict wore exactly at his first appearance on the loggia, but I know most bishops have a simar or cassock without the pelligrina, for the sheer fact that it’s so difficult to fit the mozetta over it.

Just an idea.
A simar is really nothing more than a cassock with the pelligrina attached. Most (if not all) bishops use a cassock with a detached pelligrina.
 
The simar also has the double sleeves which differentiate it from the cassock.
 
Thank you for that distinction between being an ‘attendant’, and that of being a celebrant, or concelebrant of a liturgical service.

Would you please inform me of what liturgical service was taking place at the time when Pope Francis was not wearing the mozzetta?

God’s peace be with you.
The Apostolic Benediction “Urbi et Orbi” calls for choir dress.
 
The Apostolic Benediction “Urbi et Orbi” calls for choir dress.
Is the Apostolic Benediction a liturgical ceremony? If so, was Pope Francis the celebrant, or an attendant? If he was the celebrant of a liturgical ceremony, Pope Francis would not be required to wear the Mozzetta, (so it seems to me).

God’s peace be with you.
 
Choir dress does not include the stole. Often, cassock, surplice and stole are worn for liturgies and sacraments which take place outside of Mass. For instance, we had the Rite of Election at our Cathedral a few weeks ago, and the bishop wore his choir cassock, rochet, stole, mozzetta, cope, zucchetto, and mitre; this was appropriate dress for the situation.

Like wise, it is appropriate for a priest to wear his cassock and surplice (which alone constitute his choir dress), with a stole to hear confessions.

With any form of choir dress for Latin Rite minister (except the pope and certain canons), the stole is not worn unless that person is handling the Blessed Sacrament (including receiving it from the celebrant).
 
Is the Apostolic Benediction a liturgical ceremony? If so, was Pope Francis the celebrant, or an attendant? If he was the celebrant of a liturgical ceremony, Pope Francis would not be required to wear the Mozzetta, (so it seems to me).

God’s peace be with you.
It is a non-liturgical ritual of public prayer. It calls for choir dress. Choir dress is not ONLY for attendance at liturgical functions - it is for public prayer services as well. What the Pope was wearing was house dress. That’s his prerogative, of course, as he is the Lawgiver and is free to decree what clerical attire should be worn when, but it is not in accordance with the traditional norms.
 
It is a non-liturgical ritual of public prayer. It calls for choir dress. Choir dress is not ONLY for attendance at liturgical functions - it is for public prayer services as well. What the Pope was wearing was house dress. That’s his prerogative, of course, as he is the Lawgiver and is free to decree what clerical attire should be worn when, but it is not in accordance with the traditional norms.
So we may conclude that Pope Francis did not choose to wear the proper vestments for a non-liturgical ceremony. The mozzetta vestment which he chose not to wear was the traditional vestment for a dignitary of the Church which represents his ecclesiastical authority.

I think we can conclude that Pope Francis is not a traditionalist when it applies to outwardly demonstrating his ecclessiastical authority. The authority of the Holy Spirit and of the Word of God seem to be of more importance to him when he is the public realm

God’s peace
 
Why are we speculating on the motivations of someone that we have never met? Why should anyone care about this?
 
If that quote is accurate, that is disconcerting.
I cannot accept that a man just elected Pope would intend to say something to disparage former Popes and the papacy. It makes no sense and does not fit the man at all. I believe either it is a contrived quote or the Pope meant it in some other way then people are intending.
 
Papal choir dress consists of: stole, mozzetta, rochet and cassock.

It is worn: when the Pope attends but does not celebrate a liturgy, when the Pope is giving a blessing outside of a regular occasion (Mass), at consistories, when receiving dignitaries, and so on.

It is very weird that the Pope did not wear choir dress for the Urbi et Orbi, because it seems for as long as we have pictures, he either wears choir dress or vestments (cope or chasuble and mitre).
 
I cannot believe that - with all the issues facing the Church today - the subject of whether the new Pope was appropriately dressed has gone on for 4 pages already.
 
I cannot believe that - with all the issues facing the Church today - the subject of whether the new Pope was appropriately dressed has gone on for 4 pages already.
How self-righteous of you to notice.
 
Why insult someone for providing some much-needed perspective?
Because the people on this thread already have the right perspective, and the comment was meant to be insulting to the people on the thread. Nobody said this is a terribly important issue; it’s merely an interesting one.
 
Because the people on this thread already have the right perspective, and the comment was meant to be insulting to the people on the thread. Nobody said this is a terribly important issue; it’s merely an interesting one.
I don’t think he’s insulting anyone on either side. I think he has a point. These are interesting asides, signs that have importance, but perhaps the focus needs to be somewhere else.

Look, I like smells and bells, and fiddlebacks, and all that. But I think this is a period of loosening. I think Francis is going all in on reuniting with the Orthodox (which, admittedly going small ball on liturgy is rather counterintuitive on that, but whatever) and is trying to reshape the Primacy to make it less monarchical and more collegial, while still retaining dogmatic supremacy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top