Yuku free message boards

Is it not a profoundly moving sight, to see that Papal staff borne by four successive Popes?

For the countless millions of Catholics whose lives span all four papacies, it is the single most visible sign of continuity between these pontificates, and therefore, speaks of the continuity of the Papacy itself. Mitres and chasubles may change from Mass to Mass, depending on the demands of the occasion or the liturgical season, but that Papal staff was a constant fixture at every Papal Mass for at least thirty years! That is much more than we can say for any mitre or chasuble or cope! This particular Papal staff was designed and executed for Paul VI during the later years of his pontificate, and in fact, it was John Paul I who made the decision to carry it, in honor of his predecessor, and undoubtedly, as a symbol of the "passing on" of the torch of papal responsibility; John Paul II was simply carrying on a precedent -- and at least in my opinion, a truly admirable and meaningful one -- set by his own predecessor.

While it is true that this Papal staff was carried the longest by John Paul II, should this be held against it? Benodette is right -- there will always be something ineffably moving about the sight of John Paul, in his later years, leaning on this Papal staff for support. But what is moving about it is not that it is John Paul leaning on it -- what is moving is that his action symbolizes what every Catholic, and indeed every Christian, does in times of great pain and trials: lean on God, and trust in the strength of the Lord to hold us up, to make the pain more bearable, to see us through, because He himself suffered and understands what human suffering is like. The Lord saw fit to have Karol Wojtyla sit on the Papal throne for almost 25 years, and in those years, years that coincided with the dramatic development of communications, and saw millions of Catholics around the world beholding the Vicar of Christ with their own eyes, it is inevitable that this Papal cross should become, aside from the crossed keys, the universally-recognized symbol of the Pope. What is more evocative to the modern world of the continuity of the Papacy, mitres and chasubles of previous Popes that are brought out depending on the artistic preferences of a sitting Pope (or his MC), or the Papal staff carried by four successive Popes, and which was present at virtually all Papal Masses - even those celebrated outside the Vatican - for three decades?

Personally speaking, if there is any papal "regalia" that I would prefer as the enduring symbol of the vocation of the Pope, and of the faith of the Catholic Church, it is this Papal staff. It is topped by a crucifix - not simply a cross - which bears the corpus of our Lord, and to every Catholic, the crucifix with its corpus speaks eloquently of His suffering, and the immeasurable price He paid to save us: His very life. "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends." This Papal staff topped by the crucifix is something recognizable to every Catholic and Christian around the world, and needs no extensive historical explanation or multi-layered theological interpretation. In its very simplicity, it speaks profoundly of everything we believe in, and what better enduring symbol can be carried by the Vicar of Christ himself? Without the Sacrifice that the crucifix calls to mind, we have nothing, and we are nothing -- we would have no redemption whatsoever, the Church would not exist, and there would be no such person as the Vicar of Christ. This Papal staff with its crucifix speaks both to the learned and the unlearned, to the rich and the poor, the literate and the illiterate, and it is recognized by people from every culture, every race, and every walk of life. It is a symbol of "love unto and beyond death", a commitment the Popes themselves have honored since the days of Peter himself, and I would sooner have this Papal staff and its crucifix over all the copes, thrones, cope bearers and tiaras in the world. I hope with all my heart that Wulfruna is right, and that we have definitely not seen the last of this historic and much-loved Papal staff.

And now I shall speak from the perspective of one who belongs to the Vatican II generation, and although I certainly am not laying claim to being a "perfect" Catholic in every sense of the word (God knows I have my list of sins, like everyone else), I think I didn't turn out too badly, even if one considers that the only Mass I've ever known is the Novus Ordo, celebrated for the most part exactly the way it was celebrated by John Paul II and by Benedict XVI in the first two years of his pontificate.

It seems to me that what we appear to be seeing over the past few months since Guido Marini took over - a clergyman who, if I'm not mistaken, is rather known in Italy to be someone who favors the pre-Vatican II liturgy - is not an "innovation", but a return to pre-Vatican II vestments, trappings, practices, etc. I am sorry to say this, but it almost seems as if there is an effort being made to slowly but surely remove an increasing number of the liturgical reforms instituted by Vatican II, and unfortunately, in the process, the truly traditional liturgical practices are being injured - Benodette and I have already spoken about how an unobstructed view of the Sacred Host, something that has been a focal point of liturgical celebrations for many hundreds of years, is already being compromised by this "new" arrangement of the Papal altar. And now, although a crucifix is placed in the center of the Papal altar at St. Peter's, the corpus of our Lord is not visible to the congregation - this, despite the fact that the corpus is the distinguishing feature of the Catholic cross, and that in virtually every Catholic church in the world, there is a large crucifix either above or just to the side of the altar which is facing the congregation and is clearly visible to them, especially during the Mass. What are we to make of this altar crucifix at the most famous Basilica in the Catholic world that faces the Pope but is turned away from the congregation? How can it be said that both priest (or in this case, Pope) and people are facing the Lord? What sort of message is that, and the other changes instituted under Guido Marini, intended to send? What changes shall we see next? I'm almost afraid to find out.

At the beginning of his pontificate, many who had not heard of the former Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger were understandably under the impression that he would be the "ultra-conservative" Grand Inquisitor that his more vocal enemies made him out to be. But at his Installation Mass, and the Papal Masses and pilgrimages that followed in the first two and a half years of his pontificate, in his encyclical "Deus Caritas Est", and in his Wednesday and Angelus catechesis, the world came to know the firm yet eminently loving pastor who is Benedict XVI; he was not "God's Rottweiler" who cared only for a "hard-line" stance - he was the Holy Father, who had a message for everyone, who welcomed everyone, who could speak the timeless truths of our faith in the language of modern history, and make it understandable to everyone. Now, with the changes being instituted by his new MC, there is an understandable atmosphere of confusion beginning to rear its head.

I will be the first person to say that the Church has its problems, today as in any other age. But those problems will not be solved by visually returning to the age when Popes exercised temporal power, or by resurrecting Church traditions that hearken more to monarchic influences than spiritual truths. In his lecture at Regensburg, Benedict XVI spoke of the dangers of reason untethered from faith, that man has come to believe that the development of mankind will depend on the use of his reason - faith no longer has a role to play. Therefore, the battle for the role of faith in human life will be better won on the front line of reason - not in bringing out cope-bearers, blocking the congregation's view of the Sacred Host, and who knows what other changes we shall see to the Papal liturgical celebrations.

Time has changed man's outlook, preferences, and ways of thinking - this is no longer the age when people are overawed by pomp and pageantry, moreso at a time when millions of Catholics in Africa, South America, Asia, and the Middle East live in grinding poverty, disease and illiteracy, and in the case of the Middle East and China, threatened by violence and brutality for the simple reason that they are Catholic. I daresay that people will not be all that impressed and inspired by the sight of the Pope dressed in lace, his cope borne up by two deacons, sitting on a gilded throne. We've just learned that in a few months, the social encyclical "Caritas in veritate" will soon be released. It would be the height of irony, would it not, for an encyclical that will surely speak, among other things, about the disparity between rich and poor, and the need for social justice in this world, to be released while the Pope who issued it is dressed during the Papal Masses in opulent vestments that recall the days when huge sums were spent by the Church on vestments and other lavish ecclesiastical accessories. Just a few days ago, we learned that aside from that forthcoming vestment that was inspired by one worn by Leo X (probably one of the most profligate Popes in history), thirty others have been ordered - thirty, for the love of Heaven! Are thirty new vestments really necessary to help bring the message of Christ across the world?

As a lover of art and history, I will always be immensely grateful for the Church's magnificent and peerless artistic heritage - there is no reason on earth why it should not be celebrated. But there are other ways to celebrate it than the one that is currently being employed by Guido Marini, ways that are beginning to prompt questions about the thinking of the Pope himself on the Church's post-Conciliar history, to say nothing of the contributions of his own predecessors. I think I speak for many of today's Catholics when I say that it's not vestments and cope-bearers and papal crosses a hundred or so years old that truly make us proud to be Catholic, or that make us proud of John Paul II - and now Benedict XVI - and what the Papacy stands for. That's not what the Papacy means to me, and especially as far as Benedict XVI is concerned, that's not what I think will strike a chord with the overwhelming majority of people around the world.

What I do believe will strike a chord in everyone's hearts and minds is Benedict XVI the Professor-Pope who can explain - with love, wisdom, courage, steadfastness and compassion - the beliefs of the Catholic faith in a way that can be understood and appreciated and imbibed by everyone; the Pope who, in a quiet yet firm voice, and a clear, unwavering gaze, openly condemns terrorism and the abuse of faith by fanatical men; the Holy Father whose courage in speaking about the sanctity of human life, about the right of every human being to a life of peace, about the need for both justice and mercy in this world, bear witness to the role of the Pope as the moral conscience of the world; the Servant of the servants of God who shows us what it is to see the face of Christ in everyone.

And please be assured that my attachment to John Paul the Great is as great as those who consider him to be John Paul the Beloved. Papa Wojtyla was a father to the world and his death was felt as the loss of a close member of the family by millions, including me.

Thank you, Rcesq, from my heart. I know some of our preferences as to liturgical matters are different -- and I am profoundly appreciative that we all take such difference in stride, despite our sometimes passionate posts -- but it is a great source of comfort to me to know that you understand how I and Benodette feel. Sadly, there are those out there who do not feel the same way and have gone so far as to call him the most horrible names and to say that he has been unfaithful to the Church and to our Lord -- and that terrible attitude causes far more pain than they can ever imagine. I hope, then, you will also understand the pain and the frustration of this particular post of mine, and how it felt to me to not see, for the first time in thirty years (more than half my life!), that Papal staff in the hand of the Holy Father.