Should Pope Benedict start wearing the papal tiara?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lepanto
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Lepanto

Guest
Slowly but surely, Pope Benedict has been resuscitating or reintroducing recently eschewed traditions and practices – everything from the Tridentine Mass to most recently a greater emphasis on communion on the tongue while kneeling as the preferred method of reception.

But what about his vestments and other clothes? He has reintroduced the tradition of the red shoes, several types of hats, ombrellinos, fiddlebacks, and other clothing (I don’t know all their technical names).

But the papal tiara is different. The tiara is one of the papacy’s most ancient and distinctive symbols, perhaps second only after the imagery of the Petrine keys. It has been worn by popes over many centuries, and only beginning with Paul VI did it fall into disuse. Despite this, the tiara remains to this day on the papal flag.

Should Pope Benedict start wearing the papal tiara??
 
Lepanto said:
Slowly but surely, Pope Benedict has been resuscitating or reintroducing recently eschewed traditions and practices – everything from the Tridentine Mass to most recently a greater emphasis on communion on the tongue while kneeling as the preferred method of reception.

But what about his vestments and other clothes? He has reintroduced the tradition of the red shoes, several types of hats, ombrellinos, fiddlebacks, and other clothing (I don’t know all their technical names).

But the papal tiara is different. The tiara is one of the papacy’s most ancient and distinctive symbols, perhaps second only after the imagery of the Petrine keys. It has been worn by popes over many centuries, and only beginning with Paul VI did it fall into disuse. Despite this, the tiara remains to this day on the papal flag.

Should Pope Benedict start wearing the papal tiara??
Click to expand...
What does it signify? To me, as a Protestant, it signifies all the bad things anyone has ever said about the papacy.
 
Lepanto said:
Slowly but surely, Pope Benedict has been resuscitating or reintroducing recently eschewed traditions and practices – everything from the Tridentine Mass to most recently a greater emphasis on communion on the tongue while kneeling as the preferred method of reception.

But what about his vestments and other clothes? He has reintroduced the tradition of the red shoes, several types of hats, ombrellinos, fiddlebacks, and other clothing (I don’t know all their technical names).

But the papal tiara is different. The tiara is one of the papacy’s most ancient and distinctive symbols, perhaps second only after the imagery of the Petrine keys. It has been worn by popes over many centuries, and only beginning with Paul VI did it fall into disuse. Despite this, the tiara remains to this day on the papal flag.

Should Pope Benedict start wearing the papal tiara??
Click to expand...
No. People can argue about catechesis and the real meaning of the tiara backwards and forwards, but the tiara will be the most misunderstood symbol in our modern age. It may even hinder the spreading of the Pope’s message since it will, without a doubt, be misinterpreted by the media, in a modern age already averse to such symbols. No, not everything that we do should be governed by popular perception or the media, but in smaller matters like this, perhaps it is more prudent.
 
No way. It not only has a secular flavor to it, it also has an effete look as well. While not as weird as carrying the pope around in that little chair, the use of the papal tiera has run its course – at least for now.
 
Yes and no.

I think that the tribanded mitre (for example) is more fitting, or perhaps something more closely resembling the camelaucum.

But I do think it would be fitting to have the full triregnum for the coronation of a Pope. Afterwird (or after the Pope’s death) it could be auctioned (within limits) as Paul VI did.

It is important to note that its final design was modern in Church history, only being introduced a 1000 years ago, becoming *the *design ~700 years ago.👍
 
Pope John Paul I, in his short papacy replaced the tiara with the miter. It is a sign of simplicity and the role of the pope as Shepard.
Jesus told Peter to “feed my sheep.”
 
Pope John Paul I, in his short papacy replaced the tiara with the miter. It is a sign of simplicity and the role of the pope as Shepard.
Did not Jesus tell Peter to “feed my sheep”?
 
Rickwood said:
It not only has a secular flavor to it, it also has an effete look as well.
Click to expand...
What about all the Eastern Catholic bishops and the patriarchs who regularly wear crowns? (And who have been wearing crowns long before the advent of the secular state.) They were on great display at JPII’s funeral and at BXVI’s election.

Here’s a good photo juxtaposing Benedict with Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople:

olgsilvis.net/images/pope_patriarch.jpg
 
DebChris said:
Pope John Paul I, in his short papacy replaced the tiara with the miter. It is a sign of simplicity and the role of the pope as Shepard.
Jesus told Peter to “feed my sheep.”
Click to expand...
Feeding the sheep also entails leading and governing them.

The papacy, and by extension, the priesthood, is imbued with the munera Christi. These are the “offices” of Christ: priest, prophet, and king.
 
Christ is the head of the Church. Pope John Paul I’s decision to replace the tiara with the Shepard’s miter was a powerful sign of humility and the attitude to which each of us is called.
The miter serves as a powerful witness to Christ as King and the pope as servant leader.
 
Lepanto said:
What about all the Eastern Catholic bishops and the patriarchs who regularly wear crowns? (And who have been wearing crowns long before the advent of the secular state.) They were on great display at JPII’s funeral and at BXVI’s election.

Here’s a good photo juxtaposing Benedict with Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople:

olgsilvis.net/images/pope_patriarch.jpg
Click to expand...
I’m just throwing these few random thoughts out there (in no particular order), for what it’s worth. I am not interested in debating this. So if anyone has any comments pro or con in reaction that’s fine with me. 🙂

The Papal tiara has some associations with it that people (especially some westerners, mainly Protestants) might not like. I think it has negative connotations in a lot of peoples minds.

Dropping the use of the crown was a stroke of genius. It immediately softened the image of the Pope, making him seem more approachable and less threatening. People could focus more on what the office meant, rather than get fixated on all of that old historical baggage that goes along with the old imagery. That Triple Tiara really stood out and figured prominently in generations of anti-Catholic propaganda. Outside of the Catholic church community there is a lot of baggage attached to the image of the Pope with that crown (and carried around in that chair).

It might be helpful to remember that some of the most influential converts to the Catholic church went through their periods of discernment after the Triple-T was set aside, I would name Scott Hahn and Tim Staples among others. In the early stages of discernment people are fragile, and can be discouraged by the simplest negative imagery. I am not saying that these two and others like them would not have become Catholics but it is possible, even likely, that some others would have had their interest cut short in the early stages by what seems to be negative imagery.

Most Catholic people don’t seem to care much about the Triple Tiara. Unfortunately, the triple tiara seems to be championed on the internet more by triumphal types than any other, and that must make non-Catholics apprehensive too. So in a sense it still has a negative connotations by association with certain types of Catholics.

And yes, of course, I am Orthodox and I have no objection to any bishop wearing a crown, the Pope included. The crown is the mitre in the east. So I suppose that if all the Latin bishops wore the tiara-type crown that would be the same kind of thing. But that’s not really what this is all about…is it? The Triple Tiara was exclusive to the Pope and intended to set the Pope apart from other Latin bishops, in fact from all bishops everywhere.

In Orthodoxy the patriarch wears the same kind of mitre that every other bishop, chor-bishop and mitred archpriest wears.

Michael
 
I pray he wears it again and I am sure we will. Praise be to Lord Jesus Christ I was born in such an age! :extrahappy:
 
Lepanto said:
What about all the Eastern Catholic bishops and the patriarchs who regularly wear crowns? (And who have been wearing crowns long before the advent of the secular state.) They were on great display at JPII’s funeral and at BXVI’s election.

Here’s a good photo juxtaposing Benedict with Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople:

olgsilvis.net/images/pope_patriarch.jpg
Click to expand...
I’m just throwing these few random thoughts out there (in no particular order), for what it’s worth. I am not interested in debating this. So if anyone has any comments pro or con in reaction that’s fine with me. 🙂

The Papal tiara has some associations with it that people (especially some westerners, mainly Protestants) might not like. I think it has negative connotations in a lot of peoples minds.

Dropping the use of the crown was a stroke of genius. It immediately softened the image of the Pope, making him seem more approachable and less threatening. People could focus more on what the office meant, rather than get fixated on all of that old historical baggage that goes along with the old imagery. That Triple Tiara really stood out and figured prominently in generations of anti-Catholic propaganda. Outside of the Catholic church community there is a lot of baggage attached to the image of the Pope with that crown (and carried around in that chair).

It might be helpful to remember that some of the most influential converts to the Catholic church went through their periods of discernment after the Triple-T was set aside, I would name Scott Hahn and Tim Staples among others. In the early stages of discernment people are fragile, and can be discouraged by the simplest negative imagery. I am not saying that these two and others like them would not have become Catholics but it is possible, even likely, that some others would have had their interest cut short in the early stages by what seems to be negative imagery.

Most Catholic people don’t seem to care much about the Triple Tiara. Unfortunately, the triple tiara seems to be championed on the internet more by triumphal types than any other, and that must make non-Catholics apprehensive too. So in a sense it still has a negative connotations by association with certain types of Catholics.

And yes, of course, I am Orthodox and I have no objection to any bishop wearing a crown, the Pope included. The crown is the mitre in the east. So I suppose that if all the Latin bishops wore the tiara-type crown that would be the same kind of thing. But that’s not really what this is all about…is it? The Triple Tiara was exclusive to the Pope and intended to set the Pope apart from other Latin bishops, in fact from all bishops everywhere.

In Orthodoxy the patriarch wears the same kind of mitre that every other bishop, chor-bishop and mitred archpriest wears.

*Michael

*http://ocaphoto.oca.org/filetmp/2004/July/108/Detail/DSC_0015.jpg
 
Hesychios,
I agree that the decision that Pope John Paul I made was a stroke of genius that softened the Pope’s image. It returned focus to what the office meant and away from the negative connotations that many, especially outside the Church, had of the papacy. It was a powerful statement that Christ’s kingdom is not of this world. That was the message I received when the tiara was set aside. With the humility that Pope Benedict XVI has shown thus far, I do not see any changes forthcoming.
 
Just to approach this from a bit of a different angle. The word “humility” is getting tossed around quite a bit–John Paul I was a humble man and did not continue using the Tiara when elected; Benedict is a humble man and will not use it, etc. I have heard the word “humility” used quite often when priests tone down their vestments or otherwise desacralize the liturgy. The problem with this is that it’s a false humility. The priest does not vest in finery because he is a proud man, he does it for precisely the opposite reason–he must accept the tremendous responsibility that is given to him when he puts on Christ. All of the vesting prayers for the Latin Rite speak to this, and each vestment is representative of some aspect of Christ’s life and particularly his sacrifice. So could it be said that a Pope who would pick up the Tiara again would rightly be called humble, since he is acknowledging that of himself he is not worthy to hold his office, he can only do it by virtue of his succession from Peter and the power given to him by Christ. To lay aside the fine vestments which are part of our tradition is to place a far different definition of humilty to the gesture of even wearing vestments.

-ACEGC
 
The tiara is one of the papacy’s most ancient and distinctive symbols, perhaps second only after the imagery of the Petrine keys.

**Actually, the triregno received its customary form during the Renaissance. It’s not that ancient.

It was originally a sign of SECULAR, not spiritual authority. It was never worn at liturgical ceremonies.

The singular exception was when John XXIII wore it as a replacement for the Byzantine mitre when he served the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom.**
 
Worrying about the sensibilities of heretics has done nothing to advance the Church. The Papal tiara gives glory to God and is truly reflective of the immense dignity of the Petrine office.

Bring it back - along with the Sedia gestatoria (ie. that big awful portable throne that all those arrogant Popes, many of whom happen to be saints, used because they were so very lacking in humility).
 
Dauphin said:
Worrying about the sensibilities of heretics has done nothing to advance the Church. The Papal tiara gives glory to God and is truly reflective of the immense dignity of the Petrine office.

Bring it back - along with the Sedia gestatoria (ie. that big awful portable throne that all those arrogant Popes, many of whom happen to be saints, used because they were so very lacking in humility).
Click to expand...
HERE HERE! It’s time we stopped being ashamed to be Catholic! :extrahappy:
 
bpbasilphx said:
The tiara is one of the papacy’s most ancient and distinctive symbols, perhaps second only after the imagery of the Petrine keys.

Actually, the triregno received its customary form during the Renaissance. It’s not that ancient.
Click to expand...
The Triple Tiara has been worn since the early 14th century, while the Papal crown has much earlier origins - as early as the 9th century.
 
We do need to consider that the word humility implies a sense of self, of who we are in Christ. Humility is often used synonomously with the word meek. "In the Bible, the terms ‘meek’ and ‘mild’ do not mean the passive sense of ‘subjected,’ or ‘repressed,’ but the active sense of a person who acts with respect, courtesy, and clemency towards others " (Fr. Raneiro Cantlamessa). The decision made by Pope John Paul I was unexpected and powerful.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top