Associated Press photo from 1963.
The last of the pharaoh popes...and would be nice to see popes vested in splendor like this again.
We are now far enough away from the sixties where we can now make a return to some of this without riots in the streets and that's a news flash for some.
7 comments:
I once read that Paul VI personally did not want the Novus Ordo, nor to do away with the Papal Court, nor to discard these beautiful vestments....but that he bent to the will of the enormously powerful radicals such as Annibale Bugnini, and the liberal liturgical crew after Vatican II...Virgilio Noe et al.
It was under their direction that everything was discarded.
Paul VI basically said "Yes" to their every whim.
If so, he has a lot to answer for.
As do his successors.
I think Pope Paul had a very refined almost austere personal taste and was attracted to simpler forms of vestments and papal life unfortunately that seems to have set the tone until the present pontficate , john paul I's choice not to be crowned was more signicant that Paul's choice to give his tiara away, I always wonder what the people of Milan thought about this action they had paid for it
Paul also said no most of the time , he insisted on the rite of penance being retained when the experts felt it stopped the 'flow' of the liturgy of the word, the sad thing is that everything done then seems so dated now and very superfical
It is unfortunate that so much was unthinkingly
swept away. Especially since much that was done
away with served a purpose beyond mere show.
For example, in the photo you've posted here, Mr.
Sonnen, Paul VI is wearing the fanon and seated on
the sedia gestatoria. The fanon was a vestment
exclusive to the Pope, and spared the underlying
chasuble from damage by the pallium pins.
(Why is Paul VI wearing the fanon and not wearing
the pallium in this photo? Any ideas?). Since the
Popes are almost always vested with the pallium, and chasubles don't grow on trees, fanons make sense. I don't believe the fanon was abolished
under Paul VI (I've seen photos of John Paul II
wearing it) but it is very seldom seen nowadays.
Similarly, the sedia gestatoria is both a fine bit
of magnificence and rather practical. The Pope is
held aloft so that more of the crowd can see him,
and in the case of an aged or infirm Pontiff, he
is spared a long procession afoot. I can recall
watching John Paul II undergoing a martyrdom in
slow motion walking the nave of St. Peter's during
the closing years of that pontificate -- being
carried would have been a mercy. I know the
chair was used in the reign of John Paul I, but
hasn't been seen since -- so the door is open for
its return.
I agree with you, Mr. Sonnen, that we're far enough
away from the sixties now -- I think most folks
today would agree that Catholic ceremonial was
pruned with too heavy a hand.
How can anybody force anything on a Pope? No one can force anything on them. Anyway, it is not important anymore what happened 45 years ago. What is important is what is happening now. Why do the popes continue to validate the errors of Paul VI? Or is it that where Paul VI had qualms, his succesors do not see wrong? Why do Paul VI's succesors continue on the path that is destroying the Church?
I have to add that not only Paul VI's succesors have validated his errors, but have gone beyond him. This is the real tragedy of the conciliar Catholic Church.
The pope isn't wearing the pallium in this photo because it was taken prior to his investiture with the pallium (as part of the coronation rite). This photo is of Paul enroute to his coronation ceremony.
Post a Comment