I found something you should know about.
Preamble: Surely someone with little intellectual flexibility will opine that all the heraldry stuff is meaningless in our sophisticated modern world, or that people who are interested in it are, well, as effete as they really are behind closed doors.
I respond that symbols make a difference. They herald something.
That said… you will remember the dust up a few weeks ago when for the Papal Sunday Angelus, a new drapery was suspend at the Holy Father’s window at the Apostolic Palace. The drapery, with the Pope’s personal coat-of-arms, included the traditional papal tiara rather than the miter which was adopted at the time of his election.
The coat-of-arms was designed by soon-to-be Card. Montezemolo. The miter, rather than the tiara, is an innovation. The change means something.
Furthermore, there is a difference between the Pope’s personal coat-of-arms and the coat-of-arms of the Holy See and therefore the entities of the Holy See. You will see, for example, on the letterhead of a Vatican dicastery the crossed keys surmounted by the papal tiara.
Now take a look at this:
When the papal coat-of-arms was introduced as the Pope’s personal symbol the Secretary of State said that the tiara remains in use for the offices of the Holy See.
It would be good to know precisely what the policy of the Holy See is in this regard.
Changing important symbols means something.
In this case we are considering a heraldic “grammar”, if you will. In my view, that grammar should be respected. In our liturgical worship formal changes caused a change in identity. Some changes are simply not good even when they are well-intentioned.
A change of the tiara to a miter seems to have something to do with a change in someone’s view of the authority of the Roman Pontiff.