Why is Cardinal Scola's Pallium upside down? (also is this the first time it's ever been given outside of Mass?)

  • Thread starter Thread starter PazzoGrande
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

PazzoGrande

Guest
Here’s a video of the Holy Father conferring it on the new Archbishop of Milan

youtube.com/watch?v=heaf4yvgdd0&feature=feedlik

The Holy Father put the pallium on him upside-down. Was that just a mistake, or was that done for a reason? (I also noticed he sometimes puts on the biretta incorrectly when he puts it on a new Cardinal, so I guess it could just be a mistake.)

Also, was this the first time the Holy Father gave a Pallium outside of the regular Pallium Mass?
 
PazzoGrande said:
Here’s a video of the Holy Father conferring it on the new Archbishop of Milan

youtube.com/watch?v=heaf4yvgdd0&feature=feedlik

The Holy Father put the pallium on him upside-down. Was that just a mistake, or was that done for a reason? (I also noticed he sometimes puts on the biretta incorrectly when he puts it on a new Cardinal, so I guess it could just be a mistake.)

Also, was this the first time the Holy Father gave a Pallium outside of the regular Pallium Mass?
Click to expand...
I’d assume that it’s a mistake because he’s old and tired from all the stress leading the Church. He desperately needs our prayers.
 
Inquiringperson said:
I’d assume that it’s a mistake because he’s old and tired from all the stress leading the Church. He desperately needs our prayers.
Click to expand...
I’d assume it’s because it was just handed to him upside down and he didn’t pay attention as it went on. Not every little mistake is because of the burdens of running the Church.

He does work hard but I think we’re reading too much into it when we make it as if everything is a little martyrdom.
 
PazzoGrande said:
I’d assume it’s because it was just handed to him upside down and he didn’t pay attention as it went on.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Having seen the video, it looked as though the pallium was just kind of folded over and it was hard to tell which end was which until it was straightened out.
 
MarkThompson said:
Agreed. Having seen the video, it looked as though the pallium was just kind of folded over and it was hard to tell which end was which until it was straightened out.
Click to expand...
The same impression I had. Surprising, though, that Msgr Marini didn’t catch it. He’s usually so precise about such things.
 
I wonder if they were just making sure that the crosses were on top- Upside down but not inside out. As far as the Archbishop of Milan being given the pallium on a different date than the other cardinals, I read that he could not make it due to his nomination as Archbishop of Milan just the day before. So it was rescheduled but he became ill on that date so it was rescheduled again. vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/homepage/news/detail/articolo/scola-pallio-papa-8237/
 
zab said:
I wonder if they were just making sure that the crosses were on top- Upside down but not inside out. As far as the Archbishop of Milan being given the pallium on a different date than the other cardinals, I read that he could not make it due to his nomination as Archbishop of Milan just the day before. So it was rescheduled but he became ill on that date so it was rescheduled again. vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/homepage/news/detail/articolo/scola-pallio-papa-8237/
Click to expand...
Nevertheless, in cases like that, I’d think it would be either given to a delegate or the person would just have to wait for the one next year.

I wondered if the Pope gave Scola a special conferral so as to signal something. They say that when he nominated Scola to Milan, it was him signalling that he would favour Scola’s candidacy to become the next pope; if that’s so, this special treatment could be the Holy Father underlining that.
 
PazzoGrande said:
They say that when he nominated Scola to Milan, it was him signalling that he would favour Scola’s candidacy to become the next pope; if that’s so, this special treatment could be the Holy Father underlining that.
Click to expand...
I don’t see how translating him to Milan indicates that. He came from Venice, an equally prestigious see.
 
PazzoGrande said:
I wondered if the Pope gave Scola a special conferral so as to signal something. They say that when he nominated Scola to Milan, it was him signalling that he would favour Scola’s candidacy to become the next pope; if that’s so, this special treatment could be the Holy Father underlining that.
Click to expand...
Mere gossip, to be sure, as is most of what one hears that “they say.” :tsktsk:
 
PazzoGrande said:
I’d assume it’s because it was just handed to him upside down and he didn’t pay attention as it went on. Not every little mistake is because of the burdens of running the Church.
Click to expand...
It may also be because he was receiving the pallium outside of Mass. The pallium is a liturgical garment worn above the chasuble. This was outside the Mass; thus, the Cardinal wasn’t wearing a chasuble. He’s in his choir robes.

This maybe some procedure that is followed when the pallium is conferred outside of Mass when the conferee isn’t wearing liturgicals.

Someone should call the Vatican master of ceremony’s office.
 
Matthew_Holford said:
I don’t see how translating him to Milan indicates that. He came from Venice, an equally prestigious see.
Click to expand...
Actually it crossed my mind too. But I can’t seem to associate an upside down pallium with an upside down cross, the historical sign of papacy since our first pope, Peter, was martyred upside down on a cross. But the pallium signifies Christ’s yoke- the Shepherd who became the lamb. What would the significance of putting a yoke on upside down? It just doesn’t make any sense to me.
 
About transferring him from Venice to Milan signalling him as papabile, read ncronline.org/blogs/all-things-catholic/meet-new-crown-prince-catholicism
The author John Allen is a pretty well-respected source on Vatican politics and he nicknames Scola as the Crown Prince of Catholicism (a Crown Prince being an heir-apparent). It doesn’t mean that Scola will definitely be the next Pope of course, but Allen says that it was a calculated move by the Pope, knowing that the appointment would create more buzz about Scola.

[edited]
 
It may simply have been that HH The Pope thought that HE Angelo Card. Scola was the best pastor to meet the current needs of the Archdiocese of Milan. This even assumes the choice was directly The Pope’s rather than just appointing the person advised by the Congregation of Bishops. All supposition that will not be confirmed by any official source.
 
Sometimes, when an archbishop is appointed to a diocese where the ordinary is usually a bishop, the Pope gives him the title of archbishop ad personam, so that they’re called the Archbishop-Bishop of Anydiocese. Is it possible that Cardinal Scola will be given the title of patriarch ad personam, becoming the Patriarch-Archbishop of Milan? Is there any precedent of a situation like this happening?
 
JGMendes4049 said:
Sometimes, when an archbishop is appointed to a diocese where the ordinary is usually a bishop, the Pope gives him the title of archbishop ad personam, so that they’re called the Archbishop-Bishop of Anydiocese. Is it possible that Cardinal Scola will be given the title of patriarch ad personam, becoming the Patriarch-Archbishop of Milan? Is there any precedent of a situation like this happening?
Click to expand...
There are a number of patriarchs in the Latin Church. They are East Indies (Archbishop of Goa and Daman), Jerusalem, Lisbon, Venice, and West Indies (in abeyance). They are all titular. There used to be others: all held by curial officials. I do not think the title is granted ad personam.
 
malphono said:
The same impression I had. Surprising, though, that Msgr Marini didn’t catch it. He’s usually so precise about such things.
Click to expand...
Marini probably figured that to straighten it out, he’d have to take if off, fiddle with it, and put it back on, and that would have been awkward.
 
PazzoGrande said:
I wondered if the Pope gave Scola a special conferral so as to signal something.
Click to expand...
I see an awkward fumbling with a flimsy garment that’s hard to figure out unless it’s handed to you in a certain way.

I’ve seen this sort of thing happen before.
  • handing someone the wrong diploma,
  • putting a crown on the king’s head crooked,
  • gloved hands slipping off the coffin handles and the coffin hits the sidewalk corner-first with a huge crunch,
  • dropping the wedding rings on the floor and having them roll in two different directions down the altar steps and under the pews.
It’s the sort of thing you see but you just move on and pretend it never happened; you joke about it at the reception afterward. “I may have taken your exam, but I won’t take your diploma.” “His Majesty’s government leans a little to the left as well.” “Uncle Bart started turning in his coffin long before he was in the grave!” “Our rings were more scared than we were!”

But if you want to make up an edifying legend about it, how about saying that it was put on upside down deliberately because wearing the pallium isn’t about the ceremony, it’s about your responsibility and your teaching authority?
 
JGMendes4049 said:
Sometimes, when an archbishop is appointed to a diocese where the ordinary is usually a bishop, the Pope gives him the title of archbishop ad personam, so that they’re called the Archbishop-Bishop of Anydiocese.
Click to expand...
But those archbishops aren’t metropolitans and aren’t entitled to the pallium without some kind of dispensation. Same thing with titular archbishops and archbishops of non-metropolitical archdioceses.

The pallium is the exclusive vestment of a metropolitan.
 
VicTorDominican said:
But if you want to make up an edifying legend about it, how about saying that it was put on upside down deliberately because wearing the pallium isn’t about the ceremony, it’s about your responsibility and your teaching authority?
Click to expand...
The pallium is not a symbol of teaching authority. It is a symbol of metropolitical authority. A metropolitan is first among equals in his province. The pallium symbolizes that primacy of honor. Otherwise, the metropolitan of a province has the same teaching authority as the bishops of the suffragan dioceses in his province. Example: Daniel Cardinal DiNardo, Archbishop of Galveston-Houston and Metropolitan of the Galveston-Houston Province has no more teaching authority than Bishop Daniel Flores of the Diocese of Brownsville. However, when the Cardinal visits the Diocese of Brownsville, he wears his pallium to indicate his primacy of place over Bishop Flores.

At least that is the way I understand it.

The exception would be the pope’s pallium. In that case, it is a sign of his Petrine Ministry.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top