Pope Francis will no longer impose the pallium on Archbishops

A letter dated 12 January was sent out to all the nunciatures by Msgr. Guido Marini, the papal Master of Ceremonies.  HERE

Pope Francis has changed the way the pallium will be distributed to new Metropolitan Archbishops.

The pallium is a liturgical vestment comprised of strips of white wool embroidered with black crosses, held together with pins, worn over the shoulders at certain solemn events.  It symbolizes the close union of the archbishop, and his region, with the See of Peter.  For a long time, new Archbishops would travel to Rome to receive the pallium from the hands of the Roman Pontiff in St. Peter’s Basilica on the Feast of Sts. Peter and Paul.

Before they receive the pallium, the archbishops take a public oath in Latin:

Ego… Archiepiscopus… beato Petro apostolo,  Sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae, ac tibi, Summo Pontifici,  tuisque legitimis Successoribus  semper fidelis ero et oboediens.   Ita me Deus omnipotens adiuvet.

I… Archbishop of the _____ diocese (these are adjectives) will always be faithful and obedient to St. Peter the apostle, the Holy Roman Church, and to you, the Supreme Pontiff and to your legitimate Successors. So help me God Almighty.

No longer.

Now the pallium will be put on the Archbishops in their local churches.

It seems that the Pope will give the archbishops the pallium, but out of the limelight. Then the archbishops take the pallium back home and they arrange to get it from the nuncio. So, they’ll have a Mass, and then there’s the “Here’s this thing” moment.

I suppose that will give bishops of suffragan dioceses a chance to be present, as well as more people from the region.

Once upon a time, the pallium was simply sent out to those who were to receive it.  There is nothing new here, historically speaking.   Also, there is nothing magical about the pallium.  It doesn’t make an archbishop more of an archbishop.

However, …

Although the pallium will still probably be blessed by Pope Francis on 29 June, and although the pallium is still supposed to symbolize  the union of the archbishops with the Bishop of Rome, and although I imagine that the archbishops will still make the same oath, probably in the vernacular (since, after all, who uses Latin?), the sign value of the archbishop receiving it from the hands of the Successor of Peter will be lost.

Keep in mind that Pope Francis has as part of his project for his pontificate, to weaken the Roman Curia and decentralize the Church.  Whatever other value sending the pallium out to local churches might have, I see this move also as part of that project.

But… wait…

It seems that the Pope will give the archbishops the pallium, but out of the limelight. Then the archbishops take the pallium back home and they arrange to get it from the nuncio. So, they’ll have a Mass, and then there’s the “Here’s this thing” moment.

Please share!

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Pope Francis, The Drill and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

67 Responses to Pope Francis will no longer impose the pallium on Archbishops

  1. mburn16 says:

    Pope Francis also has little patience for ceremonial or long liturgical ceremonies. He reversed the decision to have all cardinals swear loyalty at his inauguration, and still got caught looking at his watch.

    Maybe we are reading in more than we should. I see this as one decision easily reversed.

  2. TNCath says:

    Perhaps they’ll make the oath in Rome and then be presented it by the Nuncio in their home dioceses. I find it strange to make an oath to someone who isn’t even present. Sigh…Whatever.

  3. Robbie says:

    I think the last paragraph is key. The Pope wants to weaken the Curia and devolve power away from the papacy. The pallium isn’t a huge deal, but it fits in with his view, that as the Bishop of Rome, he is just a brother bishop. Generally speaking, I think we’ll see lots of decisions in the future that give more and more power to bishops’ conferences around the world.

  4. Imrahil says:

    Maybe the Pallium will be bestowed by the Nuncio.

  5. APX says:

    Or by not having to fly to Rome, money will be saved that can go to the poor…

  6. Nathan Barontini says:

    I wonder what experiences in Argentina have shaped his view that the Church ought to be decentralized? That the problem is too much Roman control? It’s a bit odd that his favorite book (or at least one of them) and one he is supposed to see as prophetic for our day, Lord of the World ,makes exactly the opposite point. In the book (spoiler alert) ONLY Rome stays loyal (and pretty much ONLY Peter).

  7. Adam Welp says:

    From CNS:

    ” Msgr. Guido Marini, the papal master of liturgical ceremonies, said Jan. 29 that the new archbishops will come to Rome to concelebrate the feast day Mass with Pope Francis June 29 and will be present for the blessing of the palliums, underlining their bond of unity and communion with him.”

    http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1500426.htm

  8. Imrahil says:

    A note: Pope Francis is making as many changes that future Popes (may God give long life to the present one) will find it emotionally easy to make their own – even, perhaps, to downrightly reverse them.

    This used to be different.

  9. Bosco says:

    Sooo…The pallium will be distributed the same fashion as the Holy Eucharist was distributed in the Philippines? A series of hand-offs?

    After Francis blesses the palliums he passes it back to the first person in line who then passes it back over their shoulder to the next person, etc. until the blest pallium ultimately is received by the intended recipient.

    Very efficient.

  10. Traductora says:

    The Pope has weakened the Curia and obviously plans to do even more in this direction. But in exchange for the Curia, he is surrounding himself with personally chosen, unidentified “advisers” accountable to no one. At least everybody knew who the members of the Curia were and to some extent what they were responsible for doing.

    The curious thing is that, like Obama, the Pope has actually ended by centralizing more and more power in himself. He intervenes in local matters whenever he pleases, simply bypassing the bishop of the diocese, and shows a certain degree of contempt for the local hierarchy (such as in Sri Lanka, when he simply stood up the bishops at their planned meeting, or even Strasbourg, where he cruised through town without stopping at the Cathedral or acknowledging the local bishops). On one hand, I think he sees himself as setting up national mini-Churches, somewhat like the Orthodox autocephalous churches, but at the same time he seems to reserve to himself the right to interfere directly if he doesn’t like them (removing bishops, engaging directly with local priests and laity, etc.). Strange situation.

  11. Supertradmum says:

    The idea of a de-centralized Church may be connected to a real necessity in remnant times of the coming persecution. I have thought that the local real Catholic communities, which I hope are becoming closer and stronger, will need some locus of power in the days when all communication with Rome breaks down in the tribulation.

    The Early Church consisted of a network connected by letters, sent by donkey or horse, even ship, with long, long times in between messages, even encyclicals.

    It is important that the local bishops become at the same time, more loyal to the Teaching Magisterium and yet more independent in organization because of times to come.

  12. Sandy says:

    Initially my question was why give more power to individual bishops’ conferences, when there are many wayward leaders who do not uphold the teachings of the Church. Supertradmum’s hypothesis could be true and would make this trend of the Pope’s easier to accept.

  13. hilltop says:

    One more tally in the iconoclast column…

  14. Sonshine135 says:

    Perhaps Pope Francis is too busy hanging out in the “peripheries” and being nice to the wolves to worry about the shepherds, or the sheep for that matter, in the flock.

  15. Bob Glassmeyer says:

    The more things the Holy Father does, the more fed up with him I get. I know this isn’t the end of the world, but, for crying out loud, what more is he going to do? It’s hard enough to try to be a good Catholic without this Pope constantly throwing curve balls for folks to try to play. We’re not part of the Orthodox churches, we have a Vicar of Christ, and giving the pallium shows archbishops’ solidarity with him. Taking that away is a slap in the face of this solidarity.

  16. Gregg the Obscure says:

    Completely unsurprising move. It’s become customary for rather large groups of folks to head to Rome for the imposition of the pallium to their archbishop. Recently his holiness condemned the large parties to celebrate new cardinals, so he must not be too fond of these celebrations for metropolitans either.

  17. CatholicSwede says:

    Has anyone read Winswept House by fr Malachi Martin…?

  18. CatholicSwede says:

    Windswept House of course. Even though written in the form of a novel, it more and more seems like a prophecy….

  19. SimonDodd says:

    Look, I understand, I really do. I’m sure that newsprint would be addicting; one day you’re just a guy from “the ends of the earth,” and all the attention-seeking in the world would never have gotten you one little headline, and all of a sudden you can get yourself on every front page of every newspaper in every country for the low, low price of sacrificing just one unit of the Catholic tradition. Doesn’t even have to be an important unit. Just a little chip. I can see how it would be addicting.

    Maybe he’ll get rid of the roman collar next. That’ll get him at least a couple of headlines! And don’t worry: Don’t get attached to superficial things! Priests didn’t used to wear collars. And it’s okay, because he isn’t changing doctrine! It’s just a chip. Maybe a columnist for a Catholic newspaper will give us ten things to know and share about why priests started wearing roman collars and why it’s okay (if not the columnist’s own preference) that Francis says we should abandon them. It’s just a chip.

    Maybe it would be more modest for priests to celebrate Mass wearing neatly-ironed polo shirts instead of all those goofy traditional vestments? That might even get him a headline in the fashion press, and that’s a whole new kind of headline that he hasn’t yet tried! And, lookit: It’s just a chip! Are vestments really essential to your faith? Isn’t that kind of superficial? You can’t remain “intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic style from the past”; don’t be such a sacristy Christian. And, look, he’s not changing any doctrine, so it’s all good!

    Chip by chip.

    Sed interdum, res magnae ex initiis parvis emanabunt.

  20. jbazchicago says:

    NOT A FAN of this pope at all!!

    But LOVE THIS MOVE!
    We have been overemphasizing the papacy far too long.
    He is returning to the old practice or at least, in part. There is a rich symbolism that the pallium is still blessed on the Feast of Ss. Peter and Paul and then sent out to the new metropolitans via nuncio. This reflects Catholic ecclesiology better. Lex orandi, lex credendi. Fix this and then the rest will follow.

  21. Geoffrey says:

    I find this very sad. The solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul has always been one of my favourite feast days. In his book “Divine Intimacy”, Fr. Gabriel of St. Mary Magdalen, O.C.D., says that this feast “awakens in our souls a greater love for the Church and for our Holy Father the Pope”. He also said that we should consider this feast “as the Feast of the Church, the Feast of our Holy Father the Pope, and one which should awaken in every Christian soul a profound sense of belonging to the Church and of devotion to the Sovereign Pontiff”.

    This change in practice seems to give the impression of weakening that special connection between the Supreme Pontiff, the Metropolitan Archbishop, and the Diocesan Bishop.

  22. Magash says:

    Supertradmum that was my first thought too. If the Holy Father expect a time of great tribulation to come soon it makes sense to make the Church as decentralized as possible, especially if we’re looking at a time of general social disintegration as well. Minus the scientific framework which is built on Christian acceptance of Natural Law how long can we expect an international economic system which can support easy international travel and communication? When the family falls civilization is not far behind.

  23. CatholicSwede: “Has anyone read Windswept House by fr Malachi Martin…?”

    Of course, 80% fact, 20% fiction according to the author.

    But I thought his earlier book “The Final Conclave” was more accurately prophetical–in it’s eerily uncanny description of the present pope, as one of the leading contenders in that fictional version of the conclave to elect Paul VI’s successor.

  24. Pastor Bonus says:

    A more cynical interpretation would be that this change is further evidence of this Papacy wanting to distance itself clearly from the previous two pontificates and this is one way to do it, notably the practice of the Pope conferring the pallium was introduced by Saint John Paul II. In addition the explanatory note going with this revised practice says the Pope took advice, from where? I would surmise his new appointees as ‘experts’ at the Office of Papal Liturgical Celebrations.

  25. Latin Mass Type says:

    This pope is so difficult to read!

    I am going to think along the lines of Supertradmum. And something to keep in mind if internet communication breaks down is that we have made friends far and wide. If we remain in a small local group of the faithful we must remember that we are not alone. Many others are out there in their small groups who will also be awaiting the equine delivery of communications.

    At this time I’m in an area that is blessed to have a bishop who is a courageous leader. I pray he will not be moved. We really need him here.

  26. jbazchicago says:

    BTW:
    I was speaking to a Roman friend of mine about a lot of other changes a while back. I remarked to him and asked where the pope is getting these ideas? He doesn’t know any better, he’s a Jesuit…from Argentina, and avoided Rome as much as he avoided the USA! So who’s feeding him these ideas? Certainly not Msgr. Guido Marini. He said, Abp. Piero Marini!!!! I asked how that could be. He’s still on the outs. My priest friend said, (Abp) Konrad Krajewski, the papal almoner. He’s very chummy with Piero Marini, and the papal almoner has direct access to the pope.

  27. TWF says:

    jbazchicago:
    I agree. The metropolitans are not mere deputies of the Pope nor do they derive their authority from him. The Pope exercises primacy throughout the Church, but the metropolitans, in ancient times, exercised true primacy within their regions…a model still used by our Eastern brothers and sisters.

  28. frjim4321 says:

    I see it as the pendulum having reached its peak amplitude on the right side and beginning to accelerate toward the center.

  29. Bosco says:

    @Latin Mass Type,

    You said: “Many others are out there in their small groups who will also be awaiting the equine delivery of communications.”

    Be calm! Remember, Father Z. has all of our return addresses on those Christmas cards from around the world. I’m sure he’s putting an extra feed-bag of oats on his trusty horse right now before he has to go galloping about the world in search of safe-houses.

  30. Tim Ferguson says:

    If anything, I think this is going to end up costing more money for the local archdioceses. They will have already just spent some major coin putting together the installation Mass for the new archbishop (including hosting visiting bishops and, generally, the nuncio). Now, a few months later, they will have to put together another major Mass (including visiting bishops and the nuncio). [But wait! Poverty is expensive!] It will also lessen the chance of archbishops developing relationships with other archbishops in their “class” from around the world – the gentle camraderie that develops when the Archbishop of Civitopolis in America processes in and sits between the Archbishop of Aquapendente in Namibia and the Archbishop of Pendaflex in Khazakstan.

  31. Boniface says:

    frjim4321, regarding your invoking of the pendulum metaphor: What reason is there to see this is as a “political” move? [To ask the question, may also to answer it.] All attempts to put the present Holy Father into left/right boxes have been based on selective attention to the things he does and says that, taken as a whole package, really preclude any such generalizations.

    The same goes for Benedict XVI, the one who was first to drop the triple tiara from his coat of arms, who dropped “Patriarch of the West” from his list of titles, etc. – remember? :)

    http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0601225.htm

  32. frjim4321 says:

    “If anything, I think . . . and the Archbishop of Pendaflex in Khazakstan.” – Tim

    I agree, Tim, but maybe Pope Francis will stipulate “simple ceremony” or something like that. [Poverty! At any cost!]

    I also agree with your comment re the relationship between bishops of different countries. But there maybe be a less expensive way to provide for that.

  33. frjim4321 says:

    Bonifqce, I am aware of the window dressing to which you refer. But B16 was also the force behind the abomination of the imposition of the Vox Clara 2010 product, [?] hardly the act of a moderate or progressive. Who really notices a subtle difference in the arms as opposed to the widespread damage caused by the current English text?

    [If you don’t like the English version, just use Latin.]

  34. frjim4321 says:

    = “Boniface”

  35. The Masked Chicken says:

    “The idea of a de-centralized Church may be connected to a real necessity in remnant times of the coming persecution. I have thought that the local real Catholic communities, which I hope are becoming closer and stronger, will need some locus of power in the days when all communication with Rome breaks down in the tribulation.”

    This is not what happened in post-apostolic times. The Church had access to the apostles for the first 30 – 40 years and a second-generation clergy formed by them. There was a fair unity within the Church with most of the problems to come a generation later. Life was simpler. They were ready to be dispersed.

    The Church in this era is not at peace. Teaching is all over the map, clergy do, largely, as they please. This Church is not ready for a diaspora, at this time. Putting the control of the Church in the hands of a collection of such dis-unified bishops or national conferences will virtually assure that the Church is not re-unified for centuries.

    In my opinion, the Church ought to be concentrating on developing a unity of doctrine among its members, so that when the Church is dispersed, the Faith will spread, more or less, in a uniform fashion. This recent worry about the the Faithful learning about the Church as a fountain of mercy will be useless in the face of an enemy who is merciless. One cannot expect mercy from the enemy and where will the Church be, at that moment? It is the people who need to learn how to bless their enemies and pray for them, so that they become the Church of mercy and not wait for the Church to impart its mercy to them, for there may not be any Church around, except the rag-tag group of believers huddling in an upper room.

    The Chicken

    Fr. Z's Gold Star Award

  36. The Masked Chicken says:

    “Who really notices a subtle difference in the arms as opposed to the widespread damage caused by the current English text?”

    Widespread damage?? I suppose a pig sty is damaged when it is cleaned up; I suppose Cinderella was damaged when she put on the glass slippers; I suppose Clark Kent was damaged when he learned how to fly.

    Anyone who can read Latin will know just how badly the original ICEL translation of the Latin editio really was. It was like listening to a reading The Pride and the Prejudice by Huckleberry Finn.

    I suppose people who thought the original translation was anything resembling the original had theat belief damaged, but, sometimes, scalpels do damage while they heal.

    The Chicken

  37. Tim Ferguson says:

    frjim,

    A simpler way (not that I was consulted) would have been for the Holy Father to continue to require the archbishops to travel to Rome for their pallia, but to hold the Mass of Imposition in a small venue – the Sistine, for example – and make it known that this not something for a large retinue from the archdiocese or province to travel to Rome for.

  38. The Masked Chicken says:

    “Who really notices a subtle difference in the arms as opposed to the widespread damage caused by the current English text?”

    Widespread damage?? I suppose a pig sty is damaged when it is cleaned up; I suppose Cinderella was damaged when she put on the glass slippers; I suppose Clark Kent was damaged when he learned how to fly.

    Anyone who can read Latin will know just how badly the original ICEL translation of the Latin editio really was. It was like listening to a reading The Pride and the Prejudice by Huckleberry Finn.

    I suppose people who thought the original translation was anything resembling the original had that belief damaged, but, sometimes, scalpels do damage while they heal.

    The Chicken

  39. The Masked Chicken says:

    Sorry, for the double post.

    The Chicken

    [Some things are worth repeating.]

  40. Tim Ferguson says:

    “widespread damage caused by the current English text”?

    a bit of hyperbole, at best here Father?

    Every place I’ve been, the translations have either been received with either enthusiastic support, or a few months of mild inconvenience, settling into peaceful acceptance. I suppose, in places where the clergy have done a right good job of whining, pouting, and agitating, people are still upset – but even in those few pockets of aging dissent has there been “widespread damage?” really? [To perpetuate the myth and to stir up trouble.]

  41. Emilio says:

    frjim4321 – The new ICEL translation is real progress, aren’t you a progressive? So lighten up! Or do you dislike the feeling of the liturgy changing on you without your approval? Not a nice feeling is it? At least there was the opportunity of a year or so of catechesis before the ICEL corrections were implemented. I’m not sure my parents got much time back in Advent 1969 to have their liturgy dismantled, or be forced to receive the Eucharist in their hands… in case you wanted to talk about real insensitivity. It took a miracle in my teens to discover that I actually had a liturgical heritage as a Roman Catholic. I received my First Communion under a pastor who sounds like you, and I had no idea what it was that I was doing, let alone know whom I was receiving – but that’s what the purpose behind the agenda is all about anyway, no?

  42. Elizabeth D says:

    I do not have any problem with this. Am I supposed to?

  43. Traductora says:

    The fantasy of a “non -institutional Church” with no doctrine is just that- a fantasy. The Protrstants have been trying that for 500 years, with the result that there are literally 30,000 denominations and doctrines up one side and down the other. The Pope is being very foolish if he believes that destroying the Church will spread “true Christianity,” which presumably has been in hiding for 2000 years of saints and martyrs.

  44. Kathleen10 says:

    Negative Nellie, reporting for duty.
    I don’t have the faintest idea why Pope Francis would do this. My best guess is to save money to give to those who are materially poor.
    But if the church were decentralized, what would happen when one segment decided to be extremely progressive, and started marrying same-sex couples? Let’s say, oh, to pick someone at random…Germany. What would happen if Germany decided to start marrying men to men, being now able to make such decisions themselves. I haven’t noticed Rome interfering with radical practices. I wonder if that would be the case even then. The only people who get the hammer are traditionalists. (And it’s not even a velvet hammer.) If that happened, it wouldn’t be “Rome” implementing it, it would be this test balloon diocese or country. By the time Rome gets around to it, it’s four papacies down the line, assuming we make it that far. And by then…
    There is a dissonance between talk about decentralizing power and what Pope Francis has said and done in his papacy thus far, and all the signals he seems to put out.

  45. frjim4321 says:

    “Anyone who can read Latin will know just how badly the original ICEL translation of the Latin editio really was. It was like listening to a reading The Pride and the Prejudice by Huckleberry Finn.”

    Um, I’m pretty sure it’s safe to assume that almost everyone here is at least minimally conversant in the matter of the development/regression toward the VC2010. Which would mean that almost everyone here knows very well that NO competent liturgists:

    (1) think the ICEL1973 was perfect,
    (2) think the ICEL1973 was anything more than temporary,
    (3) think the ICEL1973 should have been retained indefinitely.

    So, the discussion is not about the ICEL1973 v. the VC2010 … its about the utter failure of the VC2010, in that 25 years of intense scholarly work that produced the ICEL1998 was squandered, that the real ICEL was eviscerated, that a fake ICEL produced and inferior product that VC further corrupted.

    Please, I know the history and I’m sure everyone here does. So please don’t keep throwing up the false dichotomy between the 1973 and 2010 products. It’s so dishonest.

    [Careful, now. It is legitimate to compare and contrast the obsolete 1973 ICEL and the current 2011 ICEL. These are the two versions that had approval and were/are being used.]

  46. frjim4321 says:

    Oh, BTW, Huckleberry Finn was a character, not an author.

    That said, I think Mark Twain could have done a better job than Vox Clara.

  47. Atra Dicenda, Rubra Agenda says:

    @frjim4321

    I still remember a few years ago really digging into the liturgy and the Mass for the first time in my early 20s (prior to the updated ICEL 3rd ed. Missal). Not surprisingly I had come into the mentorship of a young and traditional priest who also not surprisingly was relegated to an impoverished parish on the Southeast side of my home diocese by the liberal priest in charge of recommending parish assignments. I purchased a personal NO Missal as a devotional and to assist with my conscious inward participation at the Mass. Mind you I have no formal Latin training, but it very quickly became apparent to me that something was horribly wrong with the translations in my Missal (why always dropping the word “holy” to describe aspects of Jesus Christ, his Blessed Mother, the Eucharist, or the Church????????).

    But it wasn’t just the biased/slanted, non-Catholic, anti-Incarnational, anti-hierarchical, anti-Trinitarian, anti-Divine Justice, Protestant-appeasing, contortionist crap translations. Even the internal arrangement of dialogue in the English was terrible, at best like some sappy dated 70s tv show banter. A singular and simple example is in the previous NO/OF Preface: Why did the people say “It is right to give him thanks and praise” to which the priest subsequently responded “It is truly right and just…” Clearly the priest is supposed to be repeating what the people just said for added effect, hence the additional word “truly” (vere) to the phrase, but the ICEL in their typical abominable dynamic equivalence (aka protestant schmoozing) decided to translate the same 4 Latin words in the wrong way for the people and then the right way for the priest. Total disconnect. The most important criterion for the ICEL’s dynamic equivalence seemed to be whether or not the translation agrees with what the Lutherans and Anglicans are saying.

    I didn’t require formal Latin training to notice the same 4 Latin words (Dignum et justum est) had been translated in different ways on the same page in my Missal. It also didn’t take me long to notice how all the Collect’s “Deus” or “Deus omnipotens” were being translated simply as “Father”. And almost all the “sanctae” were just left out of the translations. I was scandalized by it. Really, honestly, deeply scandalized. I realized that I wasn’t praying the Mass in English, I was praying some made up “abomination” that roughly summarized in a very non-Catholic way what the Latin said and that would not be offensively-Catholic to most Protestants. No one had to tell me to be deeply scandalized by this, shame is a gift in that way.

    Later, I found this website. Then I found the 1962 Missal. Then I moved to a diocese that accepts/supports its EF parish. I don’t need the Fr. Jims or Fr. Jays or Fr. Steve’s ruining my religion for me, or for my children. I don’t need any Ass. of Catholic priest organizers. I don’t need snakes in collars suggesting the use of barrier contraception to my kids in the confessional if they ever have to confess a sexual sin. Enough scandal is enough scandal. Awaiting the biological solution and saying my prayers. Maranâ thâ’

  48. Atra Dicenda, Rubra Agenda says:

    Sorry I went down a huge side tangent there. Frjim does that to me. Regarding the pallium, there are bigger fish to fry.

  49. frjim4321 says:

    Atra, it is my charming personality that made you do that.

  50. SimonDodd says:

    frjim4321 says: “I see it as the pendulum having reached its peak amplitude on the right side and beginning to accelerate toward the center.” Such comments make sense when one considers that Fr. McBrien was called a theologian of the center; for some, the spectrum runs all the way from the far right on one side to the center on the other.

  51. Boniface says:

    Mark Twain was a nom de plume, not an author.

    Hah.

    Samuel Clemens was the same author who thought his biography of St. Joan of Arc was his best work.

  52. Boniface says:

    frjim4321, you said it was not “moderate” or “progressive” of Benedict XVI to (putatively) attempt to impose the 2010 Vox Clara 2010 translation of the missal. That still gets us nowhere in terms of understanding Pope Francis’ change in the pallium procedure, much less interpreting it in terms of a “pendulum” shift away from a putatively conservative Benedictine papacy. Some have accused Francis of acting autocratically in these many sudden breaks from (at least) recent practice or tradition. Are autocratic acts inherently “conservative”? Or is it the nature of the decision? How could one say a more literal translation of the 2002 Roman Missal is “conservative,” especially given that (as we all verrrrry well know), it’s closer in English to the originally-promulgated 1969 Latin version, so unpopular with traditionalists? Thus, again, back to my original point about the futility of attaching political labels to certain recent pontifical acts.
    Let’s forget the political labels. Benedict at Regensburg uses a medieval quote on Islam; is pilloried by the media. Francis, in 2013, canonizes 813 Christians beheaded in Otranto by Muslims in 1480 for refusing to convert to Islam. Not a peep. If Benedict had done it, the headlines would scream, “Pope stokes anti-Muslim hate with canonization.” The difference is only in what shallow narrative through which one wants to filter pontifical acts. Sigh. Enough already.

  53. Bthompson says:

    Maybe this has been mentioned, but…

    The rite of Ordination presumes a priest ordained as Archbishiop immediately receives his Pallium whilst being vested, and that a bishop enthroned as Arcbishop is invested at the same ceremony.

    Now, St John Paul the Great opted to modify this and give the pallium in person on the Solemnity of Peter and Paul, fine, he was the Pope, he could do that. However, I guess I don’t see the point of having new Metropolitans come to Rome to concelebrate, and then go home to be invested with the pallium later.

    If we want to invest archbishops at their ordination/enthronement GREAT! If His Holiness wants to invest them personally, GREAT! But I just don’t see the point of making their Excellencies fly to Rome for a concelebration, only to have the significant event follow later and by a proxy of him with whom the new Archbishops had just personally seen when they said Mass with him!

  54. bposullivan says:

    Apparently Bergoglio thought the pallium ceremony should be kept simple long before he became Pope Francis, and even when the pallium in question was his own:

    ” The decision follows a practice Francis actually started himself. When he was given the Pallium as well as elevated to the College of Cardinals, he asked parishioners in Buenos Aires to donate to the poor rather than travel to Rome.”

    Source: http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/Pope-Breaks-Pallium-Tradition-Wants-Celebrations-at-Home-Instead-290206381.html#ixzz3QHcY51y3
    Follow us: @nbcchicago on Twitter | nbcchicago on Facebook

  55. St. Rafael says:

    So let me get this straight. The archbishops are going to Rome on June 29 to concelebrate with the Pope, they will witness the palliums being blessed, but won’t receive them until they go back to their countries and archdioceses in a separate Mass, at a separate time? How does that make any sense?
    In that case the archbishops shouldn’t bother coming to Rome at all. If he was consistent and really wanted to decentralize it, he would have the archbishops stay home. They can have just one Mass later when their palliums are shipped to them.

  56. Jerry says:

    re: frjim4321 – “the widespread damage caused by the current English text”

    What, precisely, is the widespread damage you perceive as having been caused by the current English text (as opposed to the damage caused by those opponents of the text who have been throwing temper tantrums rather than accept it)?

  57. frjim4321 says:

    “What, precisely, is the widespread damage you perceive as having been caused by the current English text (as opposed to the damage caused by those opponents of the text who have been throwing temper tantrums rather than accept it)?” – Jerry

    The trivialization of liturgical worship, caused by the imposition up it of a cumbersome, grotesque text, is tantamount to ritual abuse and as such causes great harm to those who are exposed to it. [Gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.]

  58. jaykay says:

    “The trivialization of liturgical worship, caused by the imposition up it of a cumbersome, grotesque text, is tantamount to ritual abuse and as such causes great harm to those who are exposed to it.”

    Whatever about the “cumbersome” bit – and those who have a modicum of literacy should have no problems with the enhanced texts – the “trivialisation” bit is exactly what one could apply to the grotesquerie that was in place up to Advent 2011. Nor have I, a very ordinary worshipper, ever heard my fellow very ordinary worshippers whining on about the new translations, like some. A good number of us, in fact, recall straight away that they greatly resemble what was in place between 1965 and 1970 (1975 in the UK and Ireland). Of course, we are of an older generation. But then, we happen to comprise most of the worshippers attending these days anyway. Now why might that be? O.k., that’s another issue. And before any snarky comments are added, it applied equally well to the period prior to 2011 as well.

    As for the rest of the quote above – as Boniface said: “Sigh. Enough already”.

  59. The Masked Chicken says:

    “Oh, BTW, Huckleberry Finn was a character, not an author.”

    ???

    So am I, so what (okay, I am an author, as well)? I said read by Huck Finn, not written by Huck Finn. One can, certainly, imagine Huck Finn reading out loud, The Pride and The Prejudice, if one can imagine a chicken typing this paragraph. It is, to put it in other terms, like Romeo and Juliette, oh, I don’t know, put to music, with lots of dancing, hair jel, combs, and something about rumbling. I suppose one could call the original 1973 ICEL the West Side Story version. No offense to Steven Sondheim and Leonard Bernstein.

    Authored by a Chicken,
    Read, everywhere imagination is sold

    The Chicken

  60. Mike says:

    Anyone citing “widespread damage” should be prepared honestly to compare and contrast what it pleases them to call “damage” with the actual damage that eviscerated faith and worship in the generations prior to 2011. How can it not have been damaging — indeed, sacrilegious — to have blocked the faithful’s access for almost half a century (as some apparently continue to do, in wish or in deed) to accurate, reverent, God-directed translations of the liturgy?

    May Almighty God have mercy on all our souls.

  61. Emilio says:

    Thank Heaven that there was time in Benedict’s pontificate, to impose the 2010 ICEL CORRECTIONS… Thanks be to God that we won that battle with the English language, which in many ways is the new Greek, the contemporary Latin for our world today. Though Liturgiam Authenticam is still in force, there is a fat chance that other language groups will abide by it under this Pontificate for their respective translations of Missale Romanum… No corrections for the German, none for the Spanish (adjustments required for the Ordinary and especially the Orations), none for the Portuguese (the response to Dominus Vobiscum is unbelievably “He is already in our midst”), none for the French (the response for the Orate Fratres is unbelievably “For our good and the salvation of the world”), none for the Italian which is almost as bad as the now obsolete ICEL English… and these are just the languages that I undersrand. At least the English now stands as a model being the best (or one of the best) of the translations (hence the bile out of the cleric above), should Liturgiam Authenticam be taken up again under another Pope for the rest of the world’s Missal translations. If we had better acheive a unity of doctrine as Masked Chicken so well states, then we had best start by repairing our unity of worship… For as long as there is liturgical disarray globally, there will never be a consensus on a sound doctrine, which flows from sound, orthodox liturgics.

  62. Uxixu says:

    “Whatever about the “cumbersome” bit – and those who have a modicum of literacy should have no problems with the enhanced texts – the “trivialisation” bit is exactly what one could apply to the grotesquerie that was in place up to Advent 2011. ”

    Indeed. Unfortunately I fear the irony of his claim is lost on dear Rev. Fr. Jim and the ‘grotesque’ text is more aptly applied to the abomination of the less than faithful ‘translation’ used in outreach to protestant heretics.

  63. Uxixu says:

    It definitely doesn’t make sense for the new archbishops to go to Rome for “just” the blessing of their pallium. If anything, perhaps sending a representative maybe even a prelate or perhaps best as a page from the old days with a priest, deacon, or subdeacon sent from Rome to formally present the pallium at the ordination/enthronement.

  64. frahobbit says:

    Bob Glassmeyer says:
    29 January 2015 at 12:02 pm
    “The more things the Holy Father does, the more fed up with him I get. I know this isn’t the end of the world, but, for crying out loud, what more is he going to do? It’s hard enough to try to be a good Catholic without this Pope constantly throwing curve balls for folks to try to play…”

    If he had been doing these things back in the 60’s it might have been having the intended effect of (I assume) zinging a stationary church to get moving. But after 40 years of little or no handing on of the faith-culture, these “themes” he wants to introduce have no foundation to rely on; or maybe I should say, no keel. The ship starts swaying ever more from side to side until the gunwales go underwater and the ship downfloods.

  65. Bob Glassmeyer says:

    I think Simon Dodd makes some excellent points. And I agree that, and from my own personal experience, one can easily become a “sacristy Christian.” One can get too caught up in externals and lose sight of what the externals mean, not to mention Christian charity.

    Yet, in a sense, I don’t think it’s “all good.” Externals do indeed mean something, and if we sacrifice them on the altar of “it’s not essential doctrine being got rid of,” then we also miss the boat.

    With respect, we are Catholics, not Unitarian Universalists.