Replies

>>Though not worn by either of Pope Paul's successors, Popes John Paul I and John Paul II, it has not been abolished and it remains the symbol of the papacy and the Holy See, featured in the coat of arms of the Vatican and on many papal coats of arms.
>>It remains possible that the next pope or any of his successors could decide to reinstate the use of the Papal Tiara for ceremonial use.<<

If Pope Benedict XVI would like to make an unequivocal symbolic gesture of a return to the solid foundations of the Church, he could not find a better way than by simply wearing a tiara for one ceremonial occasion. The media would turn handsprings, and the world would be swamped with the news of what the Pope put on his head. There would be no stopping the information. It would spread like wildfire, plain and simple. And all he would have to do is put on a hat.

What kind of an occasion? A very good example would be the solemn definition of one article of dogma. There are several such articles on the back burner, and the erstwhile Cardinal Ratzinger has been personally involved in research on them. Nobody has to tell him that the last article defined, the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, made by Pope Pius XII on All Saints Day, 1950, was given from the Chair of Peter with the Holy Father wearing his tiara. It is one of the things that imparts a sense of official permanance and authority to whatever the pope is doing at the time.

In fact, while some of the more "conservative" commentators on JPII claim that he dogmatically defined the ordination of priests as that for which men are eligible and women are not, since JPII was not sitting on the chair of Peter and was not wearing any triple tiara, and the language he used was only minimally definitive in nature, the question of how authoritative it was is now up for question by those who are politically or otherwise opposed to it. Pope Benedict XVI has seen all this, and being the astute observer that he is, has no doubt thought about it with his analytical and intelligent mind. We should have no doubts about how well he can see the effects of the Holy See's actions.

>>With the disappearance of the papal coronation, the British Monarch is now the only major monarch to receive a coronation. All others, like modern popes, are inaugurated into office.<<

It is quite interesting for me to see the liberal commentators talking about the recent events, and they proclaim with such smug confidence such things as, "You have to remember that we had something called Vatican II that changed (fill in the blank)," or, "The pope is no longer seen so much as the head of the Church but rather as an equal among equals." On one such occasion, an understudy of the Cardinal, Ratzinger, Fr. Fessio, corrected a journalist saying that Gregorian Chant was not "passed off at Vatican II" but is specifically described there as having "pride of place in the Mass;" and that Latin was not displaced with the vernacular languages at Vatican II, but rather reaffirmed as the native tongue of the Roman Rite.

It was none other than Pope John XXIII, not long after he got Vatican II started, who issued an official document that urged all schools in the Western Church to continue to teach and use Latin. It was rather the failure of the bishops of the world to be obedient to this directive, and to prefer the new "status" founded on SC 22.2 to dispense with Latin and use English or whatever, instead. I saw one Cardinal, from New York if I'm not mistaken, make a joke about using Latin before the conclave began. Such jokes could become a source of embarrassment to indiscreet liberals.

It seems to me that nothing is stopping Pope Benedict XVI from being crowned. All he would have to do is announce it and do it.

What about the Orthodox? Would they be resentful of the allusion to the primacy of Peter? Or would they be inclined to welcome a more dignified patriarchal image? Pope Benedict XVI knows the answer to that question!

>>A future pope could decide to be crowned and wear one of the Triple Tiaras, however: the recent increased usage of some traditional elements, most notably the Tridentine Mass, which in an about turn is now being approved for usage more widely5, might open up the prospect of a return of the papal symbol pre-Vatican II.

As a matter of fact, the approval for wide use ("generous" is the actual word employed) dates back to 1988: 18 years ago, in the first half of JPII's pontificate.

>>One of the papal tiaras remains in use, however, as [it] is placed on the head of a statue of St. Peter to honour him as the first pope on the feast of Saints Peter and Paul, June 29.<<

At the end of the Papal Bull, Quo Primum, the saints Peter and Paul are mentioned in a role conspicuously protective for the Church.

Could June 29th of 2005 be the day that the current Pontiff follows the protective lead of the first, and the tradition that he exemplifies?