![o{]:¬)](http://www.wdtprs.com/blog/wp-images/topimage.JPG)
11 Oct: Blessed John XXIII
BTW… today at the Vatican Basilica it is the feast of Bl. John XXIII.
Today is also the 46th anniversary of the opening of the Second Vatican Council.
11 October 2008
• • • • • •
23 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Did Blessed John XXIII die on this day, or is it his feast day because he opened the Second Vatican Council on this day?
Comment by Geoffrey — 11 October 2008 @ 5:28 pmJust wondering if any of the people in that picture are still living, especially the priests to the far right of the picture (to John XXIII’s left).
Comment by TNCath — 11 October 2008 @ 5:33 pmThat man on the far right- does anyone know to what guard he belongs? I’ve seen his uniform elsewhere, and I remember reading somewhere that Pope Paul VI (I believe) abolished two branches of the Holy See’s corps of soldiers.
On a side note, the helmet kind of reminds me of the Elves’ helmets in the prologue to Jackson’s FOTR.
Comment by Jonathan Knox — 11 October 2008 @ 5:48 pmThat is the Pontifical Noble Guard, made up of Roman or Papal Nobility.
Comment by Geoffrey — 11 October 2008 @ 5:53 pmBlessed John XXIII wearing the tiara, fanon, and episcopal gloves?
Next you’ll tell me he only offered the Tridentine Mass!
Comment by Thomas — 11 October 2008 @ 6:21 pmPope Blessed John XXIII died on 3 June 1963. I believe this date was chosen to commemorate his work for the Council.
Comment by A Random Friar — 11 October 2008 @ 6:45 pmI wish Popes would go back to wearing the triple tiara and use a crosier that looks like it derives from a shepherd’s staff.
Comment by Howard — 11 October 2008 @ 9:03 pmThe triple cross staff would be better.
Comment by dominic1962 — 11 October 2008 @ 9:13 pmI remember reading somewhere that Pope Paul VI (I believe) abolished two branches of the Holy See’s corps of soldiers.
The Noble Guard and the Palatine Guard were both abolished by Paul VI.
I believe the Noble Guard was only open to members of the Black Nobility (those who supported the Papacy after the unification of Italy).
Comment by dcs — 11 October 2008 @ 10:24 pmI hate writing long comments, but here are some citations regarding the Pontifical Noble Guard:
“The Noble Guard was a bodyguard of gentlemen established in 1801, of which a detachment was on duty whenever the pope attended a public function. The commandant was always a Roman prince, decorated with the Order of Christ, and every member had to be of a family which had borne 16 quarterings of nobility for not less than 60 years and had to have a certain income and stature, as well as unimpeachable health and character. Their uniform was ordinarily a cuirasser’s helmet with plume, tunic and belts, trousers and saber, but on special occasions a bearskin, white breeches and top boots were worn” (Cf. A Catholic Dictionary, Donald Attwater, 1958).
“From 1485 to today, the designation of the Corps I was honoured to command changed repeatedly in keeping with the requisites of the age and customs of the times: Light Horse Guard, Knights of Our Lord’s Guard, Knights of the Faith, ‘Lance Spezzate’ (Broken Lances Guard), Noble Guard of the Body of His Holiness, and Honor Guard of His Holiness. What never changed was the unbroken tradition of fidelity to the Pope which, over centuries, was sealed in blood and with prison” (Prince Mario del Drago, the last Commandant of the Noble Guard, surrendering the colours of the Corps to the Vatican Secretary of State on 14 November 1970).
You can see them in the films “Scarlet and the Black” and “Shoes of the Fisherman”. Their ceremonial duties have since been taken over by the Swiss Guard.
Comment by Geoffrey — 12 October 2008 @ 12:40 amNot exactly an anniversary day I feel like opening the champagne on.
Comment by Father Anonymous — 12 October 2008 @ 1:00 amFather Anonymous – I must agree.
Comment by Aine — 12 October 2008 @ 4:50 amMe, too!
Comment by Wait — 12 October 2008 @ 6:16 amI think the Palatine Guards, though officially abolised, exist in some form to this day.
Comment by Gio — 12 October 2008 @ 6:29 amAm I the only one that interprets Father Anonymous’ and Aine’s comments in a way that they are expressing doubt of whether the 21st ecumenical council was being lead by the Holy Spirit? And am I the only one that find that a little problematic? This attitude is the only thing I have against Traditional Catholicism.
Comment by Gustav Ahlman — 12 October 2008 @ 6:54 amSince 11 Oct 2008 we have new priest in Poland!
Fr. Grzegorz Sniadoch IBP
here is (then) deacon Sniadoch giving Holy Communnion in Vratislavia (Wroc?aw)
http://www.sanctus.pl/foto/Missa/Wroclaw-Bierzmowanie/KomuniaSw.jpg
Te Deum!
Comment by pjo — 12 October 2008 @ 6:55 amAm I the only one that interprets Father Anonymous’ and Aine’s comments in a way that they are expressing doubt of whether the 21st ecumenical council was being lead by the Holy Spirit? And am I the only one that find that a little problematic? This attitude is the only thing I have against Traditional Catholicism.
I don’t interpret them in that way, but then I don’t think the Church teaches that general councils are lead (as opposed to protected) by the Holy Ghost. No less an authority than then-Cardinal Ratzinger stated, in reference to the general councils of the Church, “in the last analysis many of them have been just a waste of time.” That could hardly be the case if they were actually lead by the Holy Ghost.
But I suppose this is really a rabbit hole that Fr. Z. would not approve of going down.
Comment by dcs — 12 October 2008 @ 8:15 amAs I understand it, the Trad argument is that the Council never invoked the protection of the Holy Spirit; I am not sure whether this is said to be because such was never explicitly done, or whether because by declining to speak definitively/infallibly, the guarantee of the Holy Spirit’s protection from error was not there as it was not needed.
I am not in a position to have a view on this; I merely state what I think is said by others.
Comment by Woody Jones — 12 October 2008 @ 12:58 pmGustav Ahlman, relax. That’s not what Father Anonymous said.
Don’t read into something that is not there.
Comment by WhollyRoamin'Catholic — 12 October 2008 @ 2:09 pmGustav Ahlman: Keep in mind that a theologian named Joseph also wrote once that it would have been better has some Council not been held. That doesn’t call into question those Councils. It doesn’t call into question the right of a Church to hold a Council. All it does is indicate that we don’t have to be thrilled with every Council.
Comment by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf — 12 October 2008 @ 2:32 pmI’m tired of people painting John XXIII as a liberal. He wasn’t.
Comment by Roman Crusader — 12 October 2008 @ 6:42 pmHe died on June 3rd – now the feast of St. Charles Lwanga and Companions.
Comment by NY Priest — 12 October 2008 @ 8:48 pmOctober 11th is the 2nd Class Feast of Mary Mother of God on the Traditional Calendar.
If the blessed in heaven could be unhappy, Bl. John XXIII would certainly be so that a feast in his honor has replaced that of our Lady!
Father anonymous.
Comment by Mairead — 14 October 2008 @ 3:31 pmYou could open the champagne for me and my husband as we celebrated our 28th wedding anniversary on 11th Oct.