Why no more Papal Ceremonial?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Drunken_Master
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I guess I’m a strange one, but I would like to see all that pomp and circumstance including a good coronation.
 
historyb said:
I guess I’m a strange one, but I would like to see all that pomp and circumstance including a good coronation.
Click to expand...
I thought there was quite a bit of “pomp and circumstance” in both JPII and BXVI’s installations.
 
I think when the pope says the extraordinary Mass in St. Peters or in the Lateran Basilica, he should just do it as a regular pontifical Solemn High Mass at the throne but with the Greek readings and the Eastern Rite additions. He should use the fanon but not that falda. The sedia would be good too. The tiara should just be placed on the altar as a symbol but not worn. Why wear it now when he wasn’t even crowned with it? I prefer bells to trumpets and no fistula and the tasting of the bread and wine for poison.

I would like to see a comeback of some of the pomp but after seeing the John XXIII coronation on Youtube, I think some of it was too much.
 
RobDH said:
I thought there was quite a bit of “pomp and circumstance” in both JPII and BXVI’s installations.
Click to expand...
Oh, reckon there were. Not sure about JP2 as I wasn’t Catholic then and BXVI seemed ceremonial. There’s just something to be said for the old way of things.
 
mystified said:
No, I was referring to a broad-brimmed hat. I believe they are presented to new cardinals by the Pope. The only time I’ve see them is when they are hanging near the Cardinal’s seat in the sactuary of a cathedral. I do remember seeing Pope John Paul II pictured wearing this type of headgear,
Click to expand...

You’re thinking of the galero 🙂 - which Pius XII abolished in 1954.​

 
Gottle_of_Geer said:

You’re thinking of the galero 🙂 -** which Pius XII abolished in 1954**.​

Click to expand...
Not quite true.

Pope Pius just quit handing them out to Cardinals at Consititories. They haven’t been abolished. Most Cardinals will still recieve them, but as a gift from other Cardinals.

Cardinal Maida of Detroit has one, I’ve seen it.
 
Brendan said:
Not quite true.

Pope Pius just quit handing them out to Cardinals at Consititories. They haven’t been abolished. Most Cardinals will still recieve them, but as a gift from other Cardinals.

Cardinal Maida of Detroit has one, I’ve seen it.
Click to expand...
:dancing: :clapping: :extrahappy: Cool! Glad to know that! The tassel makers’ children will still get their dinner!
 
RobDH said:
I think that both the funeral of John Paul II and the installation of Benedict XVI were quite beautiful cermonies in keeping with the solemnities of the Church. I believe that Paul VI was correct in setting aside the crown and I believe that both JPII and BXVI were quite right to forgo coronations and hope too that future popes continue the trend.
Click to expand...
Why?
 
I am embarressed to say that I have no idea what you all are referring to…

Papal tiara? Triple crown? Gothic vestments? And what is this hat with 39 tassels?
 
Along with there being no Papal Ceremony, there is no oath taken, correct?

I just realized this.

WHY?, indeed!
 
Paul meant well in leaving the tiara at the altar. He was trying to be “humble”.

But it would be more humble to simply submit to 1000 years of tradition.

To say, “Look at me, I’m going to get rid of what all my pompish predecessors did because I’m more humble,”…actually strikes me as very arrogant.
 
Struggling said:
Paul meant well in leaving the tiara at the altar. He was trying to be “humble”.

But it would be more humble to simply submit to 1000 years of tradition.

To say, “Look at me, I’m going to get rid of what all my pompish predecessors did because I’m more humble,”…actually strikes me as very arrogant.
Click to expand...
It strikes me as imminiently appropriate for the Vicar of Christ to have laid the tiara on the altar, in imitation of Him Who only wore a crown of thorns.
 
It strikes me as imminiently appropriate for the Vicar of Christ to have laid the tiara on the altar, in imitation of Him Who only wore a crown of thorns.
Click to expand...
We all know what the sentiment was behind it.

But it’s a slap in the face to 1000 years of tradition and 100 other popes.

It looked to me like Paul was saying, “Look, I’m more humble than my predecessors. Look, they were arrogant for 1000 years, but finally I’m not.”

If he felt uncomfortable wearing it often, fine. But to suddenly turn something often used and held good by even his immediate predecessor, Blessed John XXIII…into something practically anathema in the minds of future popes (and from the looks of these comments, many lay Catholics)…is a 180-degree switch that can be seen as nothing but a sensationalist gesture and a major rupture with tradition.

If something like that was going to die, if you felt its time was coming to an end, that it was less appropriate for the modern age…it should haved died a slow death. But unilaterally “leaving it at the altar” once and for all in a show of humility…is just that; a show. It’s showy, and thus not humble in my mind.

It glorified the OFFICE of the papacy, not the man who happened to be pope. It was a crown upon the visible head of the Church! Does the Church not deserve a crown??? The men who wear it will die, this was refered to already by the snuffing out of flames in the coronation ritual. But the Office, and Church that it shepherds, will last until the end of time, and have been given both supreme spiritual and temporal authority over this world by Christ…even if niether is always recognized to their full extent.
 
PatienceAndLove said:
I am embarressed to say that I have no idea what you all are referring to…

Papal tiara? Triple crown? Gothic vestments? And what is this hat with 39 tassels?
Click to expand...
Me neither. I’ve heard of the Triple crown (and that’s NOT horse racing! :p) - is it the same as the Papal Tiara? -, but, coming from a Lutheran background, I do know this… A Lutheran, or any protestant for that matter, would readily say that the “crown is the Pope making himself king.” or something to that effect. (I think they would see it as “another sign of corruption”)

Personally, I don’t know the history behind it.
 
Struggling said:
We all know what the sentiment was behind it.

But it’s a slap in the face to 1000 years of tradition and 100 other popes. **I doubt it. We’re obligated, as Catholics, to take the most charitable interpretation that an event allows us to take. That rather precludes the worst interpretation. **

It looked to me like Paul was saying, “Look, I’m more humble than my predecessors. Look, they were arrogant for 1000 years, but finally I’m not.” Just think of it as "organic development."

If he felt uncomfortable wearing it often, fine. But to suddenly turn something often used and held good by even his immediate predecessor, Blessed John XXIII…into something practically anathema in the minds of future popes (and from the looks of these comments, many lay Catholics)…is a 180-degree switch that can be seen as nothing but a sensationalist gesture and a major rupture with tradition. **I doubt that anyone (except a very small majority) saw it like that. I rather imagine that it was an incredible witness to the world, Peter letting his nets down into even deeper waters. **

If something like that was going to die, if you felt its time was coming to an end, that it was less appropriate for the modern age…it should haved died a slow death. But unilaterally “leaving it at the altar” once and for all in a show of humility…is just that; a show. It’s showy, and thus not humble in my mind.

It glorified the OFFICE of the papacy, not the man who happened to be pope. It was a crown upon the visible head of the Church! Does the Church not deserve a crown??? The men who wear it will die, this was refered to already by the snuffing out of flames in the coronation ritual. But the Office, and Church that it shepherds, will last until the end of time, and have been given both supreme spiritual and temporal authority over this world by Christ…even if niether is always recognized to their full extent.
Click to expand...
The Church deserves the crown that Christ will give her. And the authority given Her by the One Who stooped to wash His disciples feet has not altered one whit. Indeed, through the surrendering of the tiara, it might well have been strengthened.
 
Jennifer_G said:
Me neither. I’ve heard of the Triple crown (and that’s NOT horse racing! :p) - is it the same as the Papal Tiara? -, but, coming from a Lutheran background, I do know this… A Lutheran, or any protestant for that matter, would readily say that the “crown is the Pope making himself king.” or something to that effect. (I think they would see it as “another sign of corruption”)

Personally, I don’t know the history behind it.
Click to expand...
Here’s a Wiki article on the Triregnum:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_Tiara
 
Struggling said:
We all know what the sentiment was behind it.

But it’s a slap in the face to 1000 years of tradition and 100 other popes.

It looked to me like Paul was saying, “Look, I’m more humble than my predecessors. Look, they were arrogant for 1000 years, but finally I’m not.”

If he felt uncomfortable wearing it often, fine. But to suddenly turn something often used and held good by even his immediate predecessor, Blessed John XXIII…into something practically anathema in the minds of future popes (and from the looks of these comments, many lay Catholics)…is a 180-degree switch that can be seen as nothing but a sensationalist gesture and a major rupture with tradition.

If something like that was going to die, if you felt its time was coming to an end, that it was less appropriate for the modern age…it should haved died a slow death. But unilaterally “leaving it at the altar” once and for all in a show of humility…is just that; a show. It’s showy, and thus not humble in my mind.

It glorified the OFFICE of the papacy, not the man who happened to be pope. It was a crown upon the visible head of the Church! Does the Church not deserve a crown??? The men who wear it will die, this was refered to already by the snuffing out of flames in the coronation ritual. But the Office, and Church that it shepherds, will last until the end of time, and have been given both supreme spiritual and temporal authority over this world by Christ…even if niether is always recognized to their full extent.
Click to expand...
And this might be considered a slap in the face to the popes who came before who didn’t do the tiara and coronation ceremony. 🤷

I, personally, think that both traditions were fine and probably appropriate for the times they were used.

To accuse JPII of not being humble is quite silly considering he spent that latter years of his life exposing his quite demeaning illness to everyone. May I obtain one ounce the humilty he showed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top