S
SacredHeartFan
Guest
I think it would be nice but a bit too flashy for my taste.
- Status
S
sancte_joseph
Guest
It’s really good that he wanted to emphasize the shepard part of the papacy…but if we have learned anything from the last 40 years is not to go to far to one side or the other.
Let us be modern and traditional
I wouldn’t like a return of a pope that nobody can “touch”
but it would good that some things return to remind us that our pope is the VICAR OF CHRIST that he has authority like no one else…given to him by our Lord Jesus Christ.
and quoting what someone in another thread said:
“In the end of times when Jesus returns the Pope at the time will take off his crown and place it at the feet of Jesus.”
Let us be modern and traditional
I wouldn’t like a return of a pope that nobody can “touch”
but it would good that some things return to remind us that our pope is the VICAR OF CHRIST that he has authority like no one else…given to him by our Lord Jesus Christ.
and quoting what someone in another thread said:
“In the end of times when Jesus returns the Pope at the time will take off his crown and place it at the feet of Jesus.”
J
JReducation
Guest
This is my personal opinion. I believe that the fact that Vatican City is a sovereign state should be played up a little more. Since it obviously is a monarchy there is no reason for the pope not to appear as a monarch for state occasions, as do monarchs from other nations.
As to whether the tiara does the trick or not is another question. In my opinion, it is not a good looking piece. Just like the crowns worn by the Eastern patriarchs are a little too much. I’m not an artist or designer, but maybe someone could be commissioned to come up with a softer symbol for Vatican City’s head of state.
Nonetheless, I doubt very much that the fact that the Pope is the Head of State for Vatican City is lost on anyone, even without the tiara, unlike the Queen of England where many people don’t know that she’s the Head of State and the Prime Minister ranks beneath the Queen as the Head of Government. We do not have that distinction in Vatican City’s monarchy. There is no separate Head of Government.
JR
S
sancte_joseph
Guest
well now that your talking politics yes it would be good for the monarch being the pope should be more monarch looking
and that is one of those things that i mean…
we should be modern and traditional
before the tiara’s really just meant his papal power…but know since really JPII made the papacy a bit political it should act accordingly…
and that is one of those things that i mean…
we should be modern and traditional
before the tiara’s really just meant his papal power…but know since really JPII made the papacy a bit political it should act accordingly…
J
JReducation
Guest
Actually it was not John Paul II who is responsible for the Vatican City State. That was an agreement between Pope Pius XII and Musolini. They created the modern sovereignty of Vatican City. Prior to that popes were virtually prisoners in the Vatican because the political alliances were very fluid.
What John Paul II did was establish diplomatic relations with the United States for the first time in the history of the Vatican and the United States. There had never been ambassadors between the two nations. The USA did not acknowledge Vatican City as a sovereign nation, nor did it acknowledge Vatican Citizenship, much less open the possibility for Catholics to seek Vatican citizenship without losing their American citizenship.
But that’s a far cry from making the papacy more political. The papacy has had its peaks and valleys in the political arena. Since Paul VI it started to rise again, thanks to the work done by Pius XII.
JR
S
sancte_joseph
Guest
I’m educated in how the state of vatican city came about.Actually it was not John Paul II who is responsible for the Vatican City State. That was an agreement between Pope Pius XII and Musolini. They created the modern sovereignty of Vatican City. Prior to that popes were virtually prisoners in the Vatican because the political alliances were very fluid.
What John Paul II did was establish diplomatic relations with the United States for the first time in the history of the Vatican and the United States. There had never been ambassadors between the two nations. The USA did not acknowledge Vatican City as a sovereign nation, nor did it acknowledge Vatican Citizenship, much less open the possibility for Catholics to seek Vatican citizenship without losing their American citizenship.
But that’s a far cry from making the papacy more political. The papacy has had its peaks and valleys in the political arena. Since Paul VI it started to rise again, thanks to the work done by Pius XII.
JR
by JPII i meant he was more outspoken…met with more leaders…tried to make peace with nations (religions) etc…
J
JReducation
Guest
I see what you’re saying more clearly. You’re right. He was more connected.
As I read this thread I’m wondering about something else that is a spin off this topic.
I’m wondering what our own motives as Catholics are to see the papacy in all of its material glory. Is it that we want to proclaim the presence of Christ’s Kingdom on Earth or is it that we want a gratuitous show of power?
Sometimes we have to examine our motives. I can only examine mine. I know that at times, especially when speaking to non Catholics, I love to show the grandeur of the Church and her power. Then I am ashamed. Becasue the greatness of the Church is in her holiness, beginning with her head. It shames me that I would want others to admire the Church’s magnificence rather than her sanctity.
When this happens, I have to take a step back and examine my conscience. Often this is just a projection of my own pride, my own desire to control, my lust for that which is worldly. When I take inventory of these faults, I feel sad.
The Church is not about my desire for power, greatness, recognition, prestige or lust. The Church is about Christ’s holiness, man’s salvation, God’s mercy, the eternal covenant between God and Israel into which we are brought through Christ, redesigning an old covenant into a new one that includes us too.
The Italians got it right when they lovingly nicknamed the successor of Peter as Papa (Daddy). To them he was not a monarch, he was their father. He gave them life, a life that their biological parents could not give them. He gave them a direct link back to Christ the source of eternal life.
When we think about what the Pope should wear or not wear, are we thinking about the holiness of the Church, the life that Christ gives through the Church and how the Pope is ther person whom Christ called to feed his flock with his holiness and his life or are we thinking about the splendor of majesty for its own sake?
Before we ask the Pope to dress up as a monarch, let us ask ouselves what our motives are. Let us examine the holiness of the Church and her head and think how this holiness can best be brought into the world today, with all of its complexities and issues that are different from those of yesteryear.
Most of all, let us desire that our pope and us, reflect the humility of Christ on the Cross. Because today’s world is very much in need of this image. The media does enough to promote the image of beauty and glamour that leads nowhere.
The Church’s glamour and beauty must speak louder and draw the attention to the cross where the King of the Jews is waiting to be loved and to love. I wonder if a crown of thorns would be a more suitable tiara. This is just a metaphore, but my mediation is real. What will bring men to the King of Kings?
Fraternally,
JR
T
Tsuwano
Guest
Excellent meditation! I believe you are asking the right questions and I will definitely use your thoughts to enhance my own meditation on the subject. Thank you.I see what you’re saying more clearly. You’re right. He was more connected.
As I read this thread I’m wondering about something else that is a spin off this topic.
I’m wondering what our own motives as Catholics are to see the papacy in all of its material glory. Is it that we want to proclaim the presence of Christ’s Kingdom on Earth or is it that we want a gratuitous show of power?
Sometimes we have to examine our motives. I can only examine mine. I know that at times, especially when speaking to non Catholics, I love to show the grandeur of the Church and her power. Then I am ashamed. Becasue the greatness of the Church is in her holiness, beginning with her head. It shames me that I would want others to admire the Church’s magnificence rather than her sanctity.
When this happens, I have to take a step back and examine my conscience. Often this is just a projection of my own pride, my own desire to control, my lust for that which is worldly. When I take inventory of these faults, I feel sad.
The Church is not about my desire for power, greatness, recognition, prestige or lust. The Church is about Christ’s holiness, man’s salvation, God’s mercy, the eternal covenant between God and Israel into which we are brought through Christ, redesigning an old covenant into a new one that includes us too.
The Italians got it right when they lovingly nicknamed the successor of Peter as Papa (Daddy). To them he was not a monarch, he was their father. He gave them life, a life that their biological parents could not give them. He gave them a direct link back to Christ the source of eternal life.
When we think about what the Pope should wear or not wear, are we thinking about the holiness of the Church, the life that Christ gives through the Church and how the Pope is ther person whom Christ called to feed his flock with his holiness and his life or are we thinking about the splendor of majesty for its own sake?
Before we ask the Pope to dress up as a monarch, let us ask ouselves what our motives are. Let us examine the holiness of the Church and her head and think how this holiness can best be brought into the world today, with all of its complexities and issues that are different from those of yesteryear.
Most of all, let us desire that our pope and us, reflect the humility of Christ on the Cross. Because today’s world is very much in need of this image. The media does enough to promote the image of beauty and glamour that leads nowhere.
The Church’s glamour and beauty must speak louder and draw the attention to the cross where the King of the Jews is waiting to be loved and to love. I wonder if a crown of thorns would be a more suitable tiara. This is just a metaphore, but my mediation is real. What will bring men to the King of Kings?
Fraternally,
JR
S
sancte_joseph
Guest
Well i think we all got it right in calling the pope “papa”
because in spanish that is the same word we use “el papa”
and the word pope comes from the same root word for daddy(father)
Anyway yea know where your coming from and I know some people might think like that but…
I don’t think like that…my personal desire for the pope to wear a crown or become more “king like” if you want to call it that is to emphasize to catholics who he is which i think can be done through the external appearance just like some photos show of the last couple popes before John Paul
I frankly don’t care how the world thinks of me and me being catholic…i don’t want to see people using the pope as if saying “look my religion has a king as the head im better than you” that sounds silly really…i certaintly wouldn’t do that if anything we should be bragging about our very faith not external things…
the external things just express in a visual way what we believe and if we believe that the man who we call Benedict XVI is the Vicar of Christ is the visible head of the church with Jesus being the invisible head then why not have the external things.
Just my :twocents:
because in spanish that is the same word we use “el papa”
and the word pope comes from the same root word for daddy(father)
Anyway yea know where your coming from and I know some people might think like that but…
I don’t think like that…my personal desire for the pope to wear a crown or become more “king like” if you want to call it that is to emphasize to catholics who he is which i think can be done through the external appearance just like some photos show of the last couple popes before John Paul
I frankly don’t care how the world thinks of me and me being catholic…i don’t want to see people using the pope as if saying “look my religion has a king as the head im better than you” that sounds silly really…i certaintly wouldn’t do that if anything we should be bragging about our very faith not external things…
the external things just express in a visual way what we believe and if we believe that the man who we call Benedict XVI is the Vicar of Christ is the visible head of the church with Jesus being the invisible head then why not have the external things.
Just my :twocents:
T
Tsuwano
Guest
Thank you for thinking me enlightened and modern. I truly hope that I am. The model of Church that a papal tiara represents, a triumphant model, may have been useful and valid in a previous age when people were more in awe of such trappings and looked to the Church to provide them with government and an orderly cival society. Very few people look to the Church to provide such a service today and the Church, herself, would be reluctant to take on such a burden. The Church has defined itself and expressed itself to the world using a variety of models during its long history. The triumphant model is only one such model. I believe that in our present age the triumphant model of Church would be farcical, not only to most Christians but to most non Christians as well, and would blind them to the message of Jesus and the Gospel. I believe most Catholics have come to recognize that though the Vatican is a temporal power, the Church is not. Indeed, the power of the Church, as Joseph Stalin did not understand in his famous quip concerning how many army divisions the Pope had, lies in her spiritual strength and her ability to pursuade through moral conviction rather than force of arms. If the Pope chose to wear a papal tiara, then so be it, but what would it mean? What would it point to? Would it be an accurate expression of how the Church sees herself in the modern age? I don’t think so, but perhaps you could convince me.
S
sancte_joseph
Guest
Firstly modernism is the the “compendium of all heresies,”
to quote Pope PiusX
and im sure you wouldn’t want to be looked as a heretic…so don’t be proud because someone called you moder (just opinion…not judging you)
next… the church has always had its spiritual strength from her ability to persuade through moral conviction as you put it…the
crown has not been used as a kids toys that look shiny…that the (sarcastic)>>>>“Dumb people in the middle ages” said ooo look at the popes crown i think we should follow him…thats silly
Reintroducing the tiara after only being gone for 40 years woudn’t be that bad…people (the media) would at least still remember that this is nothing NEW in church history…also reintoducing it doesn’t mean that thwe church now thinks its in a higher position than it was before…because it really doesn’t higher or lower in its Glory because its the Church of God…
Again the external things that have defined the Catholic Church is one of the things that seperates us from protestants…
For truly… to quote Paul VI “the smoke of satan has enter into the church”
Again like i said its just external things not necessary for the faith but useful just like the beautiful churches statues vestmants etc…
surely even if we returned to the underground church that is being persecuted and martyred this would not diminsh the glory of the church because we are glorified in Christ Jesus and not in our proudful ways thinking about what the world thinks of us…amen
J
JReducation
Guest
I posted earlier something that Christ said to Mother Teresa in 1946, which Pope Pius XII, the Archbishop of Calcutta, Paul VI and John Paul II all believed.
He told her that he wanted Indian sisters. He did not want European nuns. He explained to her that he wanted his children (the sisters) to common Indian servants. They were not to dress like nuns nor were they to be nuns. They were to dress as Indian servants and to be sisters in simple vows, instead of nuns in solemn vows.
He said that he wanted a community that would bring his poverty and his thirst for souls to the world in a manner that everyone could feel, rich and poor alike. He wanted to make sure that those who followed him were stepping down and becoming poorer and simpler than they already were.
When Mother Teresa died her successor siad that she would not accept the title “Mother” but would remain Sister Nihrmala, because Christ did not want these titles and the Church accepted this.
My point is that sometimes Christ wants us to be both simple and Catholic at the same time. He knows who he is. He knows that he is the King of Kings. But today more than ever, if we look at all of the rellgious and lay communities that are being born what is it that they have in common? Their simplicity. I don’t believe this is a coincidence. I believe this is an inspiration of the Holy Spirit that began in 1221 with Francis of Assisi and is now being duplicated by thousands of religious and secular men and women who are consecrating their lives to live as simply as Francis did in immitation of Christ on the Cross.
This raises the question in my mind. Is this the vision that John Paul I had? Did he too see the call to simplicity that so many thousands of people are seeing? Did he see the vision of Francis of Assisi, that Mother Teresa saw and immitated? Did he hear the same message that Francis heard? Leave everything and build up my Church. This seems to be the theme that we see happening not only in the lives of John Paul I, John Paul II and Benedict XVI, but also in thousands of young people who are consecrating their lives in religious communities or as consecrated lay people serving in the missions, the slums, the ghettos and even among the wealthy doing the most humble tasks.
Before we think about bringing back the tiara, let’s think about it. Let’s ask if Christ said the same thing to the popes that he said to Mother Teresa. I want you to take a step downward toward more poverty, more simplicty, more attachment to my cross and not be so obvious in the world. I will take care of making sure that you get the sisters you need.
The truth was that the more humble and covert that Mother Teresa became, the louder Christ’s message was heard. She and Francis of Assisi have brought more religious into the Church than any other founders. They have not only brought religious into the Church, but they have brought converts into the Church through their simple way of living the Gospel. Maybe the popes saw this same vision.
We should never interfere with the work of God. As Matthew says, the tree is known by its fruits. These three popes have given much good fruit to the Church. Maybe they don’t need more tiaras, just like Mother Teresa did not need a European habit or a traditional European religious life.
Always look at the fruits of the Holy Spirit done through these men.
JR
D
DebChris
Guest
I realize I cut a lot from this quote, but I wanted to focus on the primary message. Pope John Paul I made a powerful statement when he chose the miter over the tiara. Never mind that the tiara was probably very uncomfortable to wear.… the greatness of the Church is in her holiness, beginning with her head…
The Church is not about my desire for power, greatness, recognition, prestige or lust. The Church is about Christ’s holiness, man’s salvation, God’s mercy, the eternal covenant between God and Israel into which we are brought through Christ, redesigning an old covenant into a new one that includes us too…
When we think about what the Pope should wear or not wear, are we thinking about the holiness of the Church, the life that Christ gives through the Church and how the Pope is the person whom Christ called to feed his flock with his holiness and his life or are we thinking about the splendor of majesty for its own sake?
Most of all, let us desire that our pope and us, reflect the humility of Christ on the Cross. Because today’s world is very much in need of this image. The media does enough to promote the image of beauty and glamor that leads nowhere…
What will bring men to the King of Kings?
JR
Jesus set aside the glory of heaven to walk among His people. Jesus touched the untouchable. He called his Apostles to walk in his footsteps. Do we really want an untouchable pope? Jesus commissioned the Apostles to take His message into the world. “The Church is not about my desire for power, greatness, recognition, prestige or lust.” Do we honor saints for their worldly power or for their actions, for their reaching into the lives of those whom the world rejects?
N
nightwalker
Guest
I made a brief suggestion earlier, a compromise of sorts, and I was wondering what people thought of it.
What if the next Pope were to bring back the tiara (in the ‘present’ or simplified form) for his coronation and a few select occasions (accepting of corporate conversions:thumbsup: ), and it was auctioned off like Paul VI’s?
For me it is not about triumphalism, but being legitimately triumphant, each new pope is a victory against the gates of Hell (as would be the ending of a schism).
What if the next Pope were to bring back the tiara (in the ‘present’ or simplified form) for his coronation and a few select occasions (accepting of corporate conversions:thumbsup: ), and it was auctioned off like Paul VI’s?
For me it is not about triumphalism, but being legitimately triumphant, each new pope is a victory against the gates of Hell (as would be the ending of a schism).
A
Ace86
Guest
The crown of thorns was uncomfortable to wear.
Jesus NEVER set aside the glory of Heaven as Jesus Christ is both true God and true Man.
Having the pope wear a tiara does not mean that he is untouchable.
Having the pope wear a tiara is not about showing off or worldly power. It is actually an act of humility to accept that it is God’s Will for that particular priest to be the pope and to lead the Catholic world. The tiara helps to show that he is not merely a ‘bishop of bishops’ but that he is truly the Head Servant of God.
T
Tsuwano
Guest
You mean, being called “enlightened” and “modern” is not a compliment? Ah, well then, let us all proudly embrace our ignorance and neophobia!
As I mentioned in a previous post, the Church has always had the ability to pursuade the world of its truth through her moral convictions and spiritual strength, but as we all know, the Church has also, in times past, attempted to pursuade others by the use of armies and the sword. Thank God that particular power of the Church has greatly diminished, along with her armies and the ornaments that served as symbols of that temporal power. I, for one, do not wish to see that power return. It would, I’m afraid, detract from the Church’s mission of teaching (and living) the Gospel of Jesus in the world as we know it today. I dare not describe that world as “modern” for fear of somehow falling into the trap of the “Modernist” heresy and being called a heretic.
You say that it would not be a bad idea to reintroduce the papal tiara because, well, then people would know that there is nothing new in church history. But if theology is the act of reflecting upon our experience of the risen Lord in our time and world, then shouldn’t there be new insights and new understanding of what it means to be a Christian in an ever changing world? Shouldn’t our faith grow and develope to encompass our new experiences? Indeed, recent thought emerging from the Vatican has centered on what it would mean for our faith if we were to encounter beings from different worlds. Is this not something new in Church thinking, or at least speculation? If there is nothing new in the Church, no new understanding or insight or experience, then the Church is not alive and one must ask what the purpose of Jesus was in actually founding the Church. There are new things in the Church, and there should be! I want people to know that the Church is alive and not dead.
You have also said the the Pope should return to wearing the papal tiara because these external things define the Church and separate us from the Protestants. I disagree. The papal tiara no more defines the Church than an Armani suit defines an Italian. Secondly, it is not a tiara wearing pope that separates us from the Protestants, but an abiding faith that the Holy Spirit has always resided within the Church and guided her through history, not free from sin, but free from error in passing on the heritage of the Christian faith.
A third point you seem to make is that we should bring back the papal tiara because it is beautiful. That assertion is certainly open to debate. I do not find it physically beautiful in the least. Pope John Paul I in his simple white cassock and cap was a beautiful man. The papal tiara is merely gaudy.
My last point is that I believe that the Church, in some ways, should be deeply concerned with how the world sees us. We must remember that we are part of the world as yeast in the bread or as salt in the earth. If the Church is not reflecting the Gospel of Jesus in its very life and love of the world, then the world will see the Church as simply one more cynical institution out to bamboozle gullible people with pie in the sky promises that it doesn’t really believe in. We have been very fortunate in our popes during the past century and I believe God has truly blessed the Church in the shepherds we have received. The world does not see the Church as the institution I described above and much of that vision has to do with the genuine love and humility our popes have shown for the people of God and the modern world we inhabit. Papal tiaras have had nothing to do with that.
E
EasterJoy
Guest
Considering the flak he’s already gotten over his red shoes and the brief showing of the red ermine hat, I would say there is not a chance that he’ll be donning the tiara any time soon.
telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/2203856/Pope-Benedict-XVI-does-not-wear-Prada-says-Vatican.html
The Osservatore Romano emphasized that Benedict was not a man who fusses over fashion….It concluded: “The Pope does not wear Prada, but Christ. His worries are not about accessories, but the essential.”
Besides, didn’t he remove the tiara from the Papal coat of arms, replacing it with a miter? Far more shepherd than monarch, I think he sees the miter as more emblematic of his office than the tiara.
As for Our Lord, he “emptied himself, taking the form of a slave” and “did not deem equality with God something to be grasped at.” He most certainly did set aside the outwardly visible glories of heaven to become one of us.
B
BennyBoy89
Guest
With all the problems the Church is facing, we’re arguing about whether the Pope should wear an absolutely ridiculous looking tiara? Just because something is “traditional” doesn’t mean that it’s holy.
Whether Papa Ratzinger brings back the tiara or not is immaterial to me. The man faces enough criticism from the world and from within the Church for everything he does.
Whether Papa Ratzinger brings back the tiara or not is immaterial to me. The man faces enough criticism from the world and from within the Church for everything he does.
E
EasterJoy
Guest
Although Pope Benedict has chosen to bring back many traditions, he has also replaced the tiara on the papal coat of arms with a mitre. I would not expect he will ever wear the tiara:
According to the Vatican web site,
“In secular heraldry there is always some form of headpiece above the shield, usually a crown. In ecclesiastical heraldry it is also common for a headpiece to be shown, but obviously of an ecclesiastical kind.
The Supreme Pontiff’s arms have featured a “tiara” since ancient times. At the beginning this was a sort of closed “tocque”. In 1130 a crown was added, symbol of the Church’s sovereignty over the States.
Boniface VIII, in 1301, added a second crown, at the time of the confrontation with Philip the Fair, King of France, to show that his spiritual authority was superior to any civic authority.
It was Benedict XII in 1342 who added a third crown to symbolize the Pope’s moral authority over all secular monarchs, and reaffirmed the possession of Avignon.
With time, although it lost its temporal meaning, the silver tiara with three gold crowns came to represent the three powers of the Supreme Pontiff: Sacred Orders, Jurisdiction and Magisterium.
In past centuries, Popes wore the tiara at solemn official celebrations and especially on the day of the “coronation” at the beginning of their Pontificate. Paul VI used for this purpose a precious tiara which the Archdiocese of Milan had presented to him, just as it had given one to Pius XI; but afterwards, Paul VI donated it to a charity and introduced the current use of a simple “mitre”, although these mitres were sometimes embellished with ornaments or gems. But he left the “tiara” and the crossed keys as the emblem of the Apostolic See.
Today, the ceremony that begins a Pontificate is no longer called a “coronation”. The Pope’s full jurisdiction begins the moment he accepts his election by the Cardinals in the Conclave and not with coronation as for secular monarchs. This ceremony, therefore, is simply called the solemn inauguration of his Petrine Ministry, as it was for Benedict XVI on 24 April.
The Holy Father Benedict XVI decided not to include the tiara in his official personal coat of arms. He replaced it with a simple mitre which is not, therefore, surmounted by a small globe and cross as was the tiara.
The Papal mitre shown in his arms, to recall the symbolism of the tiara, is silver and bears three bands of gold (the three powers: Orders, Jurisdiction and Magisterium), joined at the centre to show their unity in the same person.”
According to the Vatican web site,
“In secular heraldry there is always some form of headpiece above the shield, usually a crown. In ecclesiastical heraldry it is also common for a headpiece to be shown, but obviously of an ecclesiastical kind.
The Supreme Pontiff’s arms have featured a “tiara” since ancient times. At the beginning this was a sort of closed “tocque”. In 1130 a crown was added, symbol of the Church’s sovereignty over the States.
Boniface VIII, in 1301, added a second crown, at the time of the confrontation with Philip the Fair, King of France, to show that his spiritual authority was superior to any civic authority.
It was Benedict XII in 1342 who added a third crown to symbolize the Pope’s moral authority over all secular monarchs, and reaffirmed the possession of Avignon.
With time, although it lost its temporal meaning, the silver tiara with three gold crowns came to represent the three powers of the Supreme Pontiff: Sacred Orders, Jurisdiction and Magisterium.
In past centuries, Popes wore the tiara at solemn official celebrations and especially on the day of the “coronation” at the beginning of their Pontificate. Paul VI used for this purpose a precious tiara which the Archdiocese of Milan had presented to him, just as it had given one to Pius XI; but afterwards, Paul VI donated it to a charity and introduced the current use of a simple “mitre”, although these mitres were sometimes embellished with ornaments or gems. But he left the “tiara” and the crossed keys as the emblem of the Apostolic See.
Today, the ceremony that begins a Pontificate is no longer called a “coronation”. The Pope’s full jurisdiction begins the moment he accepts his election by the Cardinals in the Conclave and not with coronation as for secular monarchs. This ceremony, therefore, is simply called the solemn inauguration of his Petrine Ministry, as it was for Benedict XVI on 24 April.
The Holy Father Benedict XVI decided not to include the tiara in his official personal coat of arms. He replaced it with a simple mitre which is not, therefore, surmounted by a small globe and cross as was the tiara.
The Papal mitre shown in his arms, to recall the symbolism of the tiara, is silver and bears three bands of gold (the three powers: Orders, Jurisdiction and Magisterium), joined at the centre to show their unity in the same person.”
D
Digitonomy
Guest
- Status