Post intelligent and civil comments. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the NLM
I was a little (but only a little) disappointed to see the two equal chairs for the Pope and Patriarch. It is probably coming as a big disappointment to some that the fanon has not reappeared as they had hoped. I'm wondering why the Pope is not wearing a dalmatic under the chasuble? Is it possibly because it is very warm there today?
The thing that is most disappointing to me, however, is the MIS-placement of the three pins in the Pope's pallium. The pins (originally functional and later decorative only) are supposed to be one each in front and back and one on the left shoulder only. There isn't supposed to be one on the right shoulder as well. These used to correspond to the places where the pallium needed to be pinned in place to stay on and to be folded properly. Ironically, when the long style of pallium was adopted by Benedict XVI and the pins could once again have been functional they remained decorative BUT Piero Marini began the practice of putting them on both shoulders and in front.
Now we're back to a modified pallium but the arrangement of the pins is still incorrect. Once again a Piero Marini innovation that has ruined something that was better off left alone in the first place!
The chasubles of the concelebrants are quiet splendid compared to those in use in the past. I like also the new chasuble of His Holiness from LAVS very much. But to see the dusty chairs of Paul VI. again now is very disappointing.
Gothic chasuble and baroque mitre... Why?
The concelebrants chasubles are €150 ones from Barbiconi. They are cheap but look okay; Archbishop Marini's concelebration chasubles probably cost the earth but looked cheap. I imagine that the Pope's chausble today probably cost more than all the concelebrants' put togther.
I wonder if anyone has comments about the Greek Orthodox deacon that reads the Gospel, in regards to the lack of vestments? He is only wearing the orarion [the insignia of the deacon] over his "choir dress" - no sticharion and no cuffs. Why might this be? This is certainly not what is called for at the Divine Liturgy when a deacon serves. Admittedly, the Greek Orthodox deacon is not serving [it is a Roman Catholic Mass and there is sadly no full "communio in sacris"] and if he is not serving, why is he chanting the Gospel? There is something very confusing going on in practice that does not harmonize with the basic liturgical principles either of the Orthodox or of the Catholics. This is not a trivial matter. It is not focused on vestments or the lack thereof, but rather on liturgical orthodoxy manifested in liturgical orthopraxis.
The chasuble of his Holiness is part of the set of 4 chasubles (in the four liturgical colours) which was donated to him at his apostolic journey to Liguria.
Fr. david,
Probably done to keep the Muscovites from raising hades with him later, and to ward off the attacks from Mt. Athos.
How was communion distributed?
I rather like the new pallium. It looks much simpler to wear than the other one. I always looked as if it were falling off.
bjr
Communion was distributed on the tongue to kneeling people.
I agree with the protest against the misplaced pins.
Re: the pallium pins - I agree that it is unfortunate that they have not been returned to their traditional placement. Perhaps someone with connections might discreetly inform the office of liturgical celebrations?
An aside however: Fr Selvester said:
"Ironically, when the long style of pallium was adopted by Benedict XVI and the pins could once again have been functional they remained decorative BUT Piero Marini began the practice of putting them on both shoulders and in front."
As it were, they could not have been functional with the 2005 pallium, as it was an anachronism - it was so antiquarian, that its form predated the use of pins. If I may exceptionally quote myself from a post of last January (The Pallium - History and Present Use):
"Furthermore, even though the earliest form has been adopted, the pins have remained. As we have seen, the pins only appeared when there was need for them, because the ends of the pallium did not hang down directly from the shoulder anymore, but from the middle, to which they were fixed by these pins. The continued use of the pins together with a form that was worn before the use of the pins first arose seems inconguous. They serve no purpose, and while that is not necessarily an argument against them and they did not serve a practical purpose in the pallium as worn until 2005 and still worn by metropolitan archbishops, there they represent, as so many elements of paraments, the vestige of a former use. But in returning to a form used before the first appearance of the pins, these become anachronistic."
Gregor will correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think I've seen this many deacons assisting at a papal Mass in St. Peter's, not in recent times, anyway.
There are many good things to see in these photos (and a few irritating things, too, of course).
I presumed the pins in the pallium to be an oversight which can be corrected in the future.
The point about the pins is not when they were used for the first time. Rather, it is that, regardless of whether they are functional or decorative, one of them is IN THE WRONG PLACE.
Yes, Father Selvester, that is what I said. And there is no need to shout.
Due to the time difference between Italy and the US, I was not able to watch the Pontifical Mass this morning for the Solemnity of Sts Peter and Paul. But, reviewing the booklet for the celebration as posted in the Vatican website - http://www.vatican.va/news_servi...08/
20080629.pdf -
I observe that the Nicene Creed was professed by the Holy Father and the Ecumenical Patriarch in ancient Greek only. Having attended Novus Ordo Roman Catholic Mass in Greece (where Mass is said in Modern Greek except of some key prayers or professions like the Kyrie Eleison, the Creed, the Our Father that the original ancient Greek is used), I was perplexed why the Filioque was always omitted from the Creed. The Vincentian Fathers in Greece informed me at the time, that the Nicene Creed when it is said in its original text, it can not be altered, otherwise “a heresies would be pronounced”. I suspect that the reason they say this is for ecumenical sensitivity towards the Greek Orthodox Church. So, the Roman Catholics in Greece are the only Latin rite Catholics in the world that profess their faith without the Filoque.
When he was still Cardinal Ratzinger the Holy Father wrote a document stating that the Filioque isn't necessary. Actually, in the document he himself omitted it.
This is definitely out of sensitivity to the situation with the Orthodox, but also reminds us of why the Filioque came about in the first place. It was an addition to fight a heresy which isn't really a problem anymore.
Also, as for the pins...why focus on them so much? If you don't like the new pallium, say that. If you like it, why get so upset about the pins immediately? Why risk loosing charity over a simple pin?
Isn't it a little excessive to mention pins? Maybe it's that I never knew the correct placement of them. Also, the Paul VI chairs are not that terrible....after all they are more thronelike that the terrible little white "dining room" chairs John Paul II used to sit on.
I was only disappointed with two things.
1) The Pope's chasuble wasn't Roman style for such a big feastday, but rather then usuall simple "Vatican II" style- even though it wasn't ugly.
2). Maybe it's because he was the guest, but the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomeus I gave his speech first.
* Still, I probably shouldn't complain. At least it wasn't a Lutheran "bishop" etc.
Regarding the picture with the caption "Hanc igitur":
The spreading of hands over the gifts was moved to the "Quam oblationem" in EP1 of the 1969 Missale Romanum, if I remember correctly.
Kenjiro,
would you please stop once and for all your depreciatory and unnecessary references to Vatican II. Thank you.
JFelix,
I believe you are right, I have modified the caption. Thanks for pointing that out!
A question:
I noticed that Archbishop Babjak of Presov, the head of the Slovak Greek Catholic Church, was listed as one of those who received the pallium. Was he vested at the Mass? I wasn't able to watch, unfortunately.
Thanks!
I attended the Pallium Mass last year, and I can verify that the return of the sedia gestatoria would be most welcome. It is almost impossible for most people to see the Pope as he processes, so people are always crowding, pressing, standing on those awful, awful chairs they use in St. Peter's, etc. If the Pope were seated on the sedia as he processed in, people could see him, which is what they want. Plus, it would probably spare him some sweat on those hot summer days in Rome.
To see what I mean about the Pope's invisibility in the crowd, see the first video above.
Who are the gentlemen in the capelets holding the torches? I don't recall ever seeing them before. Are they from some pious confraternity?
Man, what a load of complaint...
My reaction to all those photos was : "Christus Vincit!"
AM
(NB Eastern-Rite Catholics of course routinely recite the Symbol of faith, in their vernaculars, without the equivalent of Filioque.)
At the risk of earning a rebuke as yesterday, I second Fr. Kennedy's remarks above.
I concur. I have attended Papal events in the Vatican, and it is very difficult to get a glimpse of the Pope. But, the sedia gestatoria is associated with "Old Triumphalism". Sadly, it may not come bach. John Paul II during the last years of his pontificate and unable to walk, he was placed on a rolling platfom that was slightly elevated. Perhaps Mercedes or BMW could honor the German Pope, by designing a mobile version of the sedia with all its dignity and solemnity. It is very important that the people see the Pope during processions.
How wonderful to see the statue of St. Peter vested in tiara, cope, and ring. I thought the custom had lapsed or is it only done on this particular feast?
A reminder about the guidelines and how they can work.
Obviously on a site like the NLM, there will be liturgical minutiae come up, some critical analysis, etc. and that's fine.
Just keep it in perspective and when you make those thoughts, please also make clear that which is good as well.
JFelix,
"I noticed that Archbishop Babjak of Presov, the head of the Slovak Greek Catholic Church, was listed as one of those who received the pallium. Was he vested at the Mass?"
Yes he was.
Pontifical Dalmatic: to the poster above, look in the 4th photo and you'll see it.
Pins: My Archbishop told me that one side does not have a pin because it represents the would in his side caused by the sword thrust.
Much prefer the new pallium. Far neater, hangs beautifully, doesn't dominate the other vesture ... the only question is, why has this taken 20 centuries? ;-)
Overall the changes are pleasing and add to the traditions of the faith. But i am curious as to why things are brought back so piecemeal? Would the fanon being used have "too much" for the world? Some things seem to be moving soooo quickly and others at a snails pace. If we are returning to our roots, wholly and truly, bring it on. I think the Catholic faithful can stand it.. Blessings
The developments at the Vatican and within the Latin Church in general are truly wonderful. The generosity of the Pope to the EP is a remarkable effort of hospitality. However, I wish that such premature events should not take place. We are not one. As most of the Latin's on the list think the Orthodox left the Church sometime ago. The Orthodox, of whom I am one, likewise think the Latins left the Church in schism or heresy sometime ago. Until the matter is cleared up, perhaps the EP could avoid giving such scandal to the bulk of the Orthodox by avoiding participation in liturgical events by those we consider heterodox. These acts don't futher unity but rather consternation with the bulk of the Orthodox Churches. Also, the eastern touch could be provided by any number of uniate clergy.
I love and am grateful for the desire for unity but until there is unity why act like there is?
Gregor,
Thanks again. The reason I asked was that I am interested in how a Greek Catholic hierarch fully-vested for Mass (including the omophorion, presumably) and wearing the pallium would look like.
I understand that the Eastern Catholic Patriarchs had been required until recent times to also receive the pallium as a sign of communion with the See of Saint Peter.
I agree with the the call to calm down a bit about the pins, happily it's something we will all survive. Despite all the wonderful things the new MC has done - after reflecting a bit, the only negative aspect of adding things here and there is that it increases a lack of gratitude on the part of some, and considering some of the comments, can become an occasion of sin. We being the fallible creatures we are, seem to forget where the Vatican (and the world prior to Summorum Pontificum) was just one year ago. Now our gratitude over the restoration of Holy Communion from the Pope kneeling, which is monumental, is somehow overshadowed by an apparent discontent over the minutiae. And no, please don't trivialize my argument by assuming that I just refer to the pins - if you scroll above, you get everything from complaints about the Pope's chair today to an appraisal of the cost of the concelebrants' vestments to the now run-of-the-mill attack on Vatican II and John Paul II. Can we really not be a little grateful for what we now have? Just a little? As an MC, I know the importance and the benefit that an eye for detail can have, as I know firsthand the temptation this can have if we allow it to obscure the "broader picture." I know we all love the liturgy here, but as a priest once admonished me (and I'm infinitely grateful he did), maybe we could all "rise above" some of the negativity just a little. Buona Festa to all!
Euge,Euge,Emilio! Thank you and I do mean Thank you. Grazie tante. Merci beaucoup. Gratias tibi ago. Vielen Dank and Amen. Buone festa a tutti.
One might even add Huzzah and Alleluia!
When you see how nicely the traditional pallium fits over O'Brien's shoulders when compared to Benedict's (which doesn't even lay flat), you can see the sense in the traditional design. Like most vesments, it appears to have been perfected over time. Hopefully, a future pope will return to the practice of wearing the same pallium as the Archbishops and the seemingly endless tampering will stop.
Can anyone please explain what is the figure at the top of the Œcumenical Patriarch's pastoral staff?
John Paul,
With full charity, what in the heck are you talking about? If anything, it looks to me like Benedict XVI's pallium is lying MORE FLAT than the palliums of the Archbishops.
This isn't tinkering. This is organic development.
I really like the new pallium. It also looks closer to the design seen on the Pope's coat of arms.
Wow- I love the arrangement for th faithful receiving Communion.
I'm not fit to discuss vestments in detail, but this appears to be a very beautiful Mass.
Thank you for great pictures!
Traditionally the Pasternuk has two entwined serpents rising to face the cross. It is a take on the medical cadesus, but signifying the healing elements of the office of Bishop, perhaps also wise as a serpent imagery.
Sometimes the top forms a Tau cross with a Greek cross above it, signifying the more monastic idea of the shepherd.
Good points, Colman.
I find the new pallium curious. The pallium is something that distinguishes metropolitan archbishops from other ordinaries. As the archbishop and metropolitan of the Roman Province, the Pope is not superior to other metropolitans. It is only because the Roman See is also the successor See of Peter that the Pope is special. (Right?) I think that it would make more sense for his pallium to be the same as that of all the other metropolitans of the Latin Church, as has been the tradition. One reason for a special papal pallium is, I assume, the fact that investiture with the pallium is now the official ceremony for the inauguration of a new Pope. Previously, the tiara was the distinct symbol of the papacy and coronation was the unique ceremony for papal inauguration. Now the Pope's pallium must bear the weight of symbolizing unique papal authority, so now it is different from that of other metropolitans, something that is novel in ecclesiastical usage. Obviously all metropolitans receive a pallium, but now the design of theirs differs from that of the Pope, and the Pope uses the pallium on his coat-of-arms as though that vestment were distinctive of the papacy, which it never has been before. So while the form of the papal pallium certainly is better than the archaic omophorion style he has been shouldering, the new design distinctive of the papacy is an innovation; the pallium now represents something it previously did not -- the Pope's unique status.
Does my analysis make sense?
Tobias,
you write "The pallium is something that distinguishes metropolitan archbishops from other ordinaries. As the archbishop and metropolitan of the Roman Province, the Pope is not superior to other metropolitans.".
This is incorrect. I would again refer you to my post The Pallium - History and Present Use.
Key sentence:
"In the occident, it was always solely the pope who was by his own right entitled to wear the pallium; all others were always only allowed to use it by a special grant conceded by him."
Tobias,
I am in agreement, and BTW would like to see the tiara and corronation to be resurrected as well the represent not only principal authority but symbolizing the Holy Father's unique place as head of our Church.Peace
Colman,
you wrote; "These acts don't futher unity but rather consternation with the bulk of the Orthodox Churches."
As a Catholic, I agree with your statement, though from the view of the Catholic Church. I could argue with your reasoning, but history is proof enough.
Great, thanks Gregor. The investiture with the pallium *by right* is as distinctive of the papacy as is coronation. That explains alot.
Still, is it an innovation for the form of the papal and metropolitan pallia to differ? Could the introduction of this distinction be the result of the cessation of coronation?
I love the new pallium, as well as the chasuble the Holy Father is wearing. I'm not expecting the sedia gestatoria anytime soon, but maybe we will see something similar. (Like a throne monted on a moving platform, or a small vehicle.)
Please, lets not get caught up in miniscule details,like how Pp. Benedict's stole is longer on one end than the other in one picture.
NLM has a reputation for such comments, and nobody wants to hear the story about the lady, the priest, and the maniple again.
Does anyone know if there is a chasuble that matches the deacon's dalmatics?
Thank you Hieromonk Gregory for your explanation of the Pasternuk.
Josiah Ross,
"Does anyone know if there is a chasuble that matches the deacon's dalmatics?"
Yes, plenty of them. If I am not mistaken these belong to the vestments which Bl. John XXIII had made for the II Vatican Council - dalmatics for the Cardinal Deacons, chasubles for the Cardinal Priests, and copes for the Cardinal Bishops. There also ought to be a papal chasuble to go with them.
The position of the pins is prescribed in the Caeremoniale Episcoporum, at least in the old version.
ThomasMore1535,
John Paul has a point. I think there was something in media reports which said that the new pallium was meant to lie flat. Evidently it doesn't and looks rather untidy. The "standard issue" is more pleasing aesthetically.
Gregor has kindly described how the assumed its modern shape, which preserved the scarf-like origin of the pallium. This has been lost in the latest version, so how can it be "organic development"?
While I agree that the ceremonial appearances of unity oughtn't be hasty, perhaps there is an underlying Orthodox-Catholic accord. This pope doesn't seem to be careless; I'm thinking it might be best to presume he knows something we don't.
In matters liturgical and ecumenical the Pope knows what he's doing. Let's respect his leadership. It seems some people rejoice to see the Holy Father looking like the visible head of the Church but they don't like him acting like the visible head of the Church and would prefer him to act according to their own pre-conceived ideas instead. Our Lord didn't give us the Supreme Pontiff to be a mere ceremonial figure-head, but to give real guidance and leadership to His flock.
Hiberniensis, I agree, and don't think that any of us should be telling the Holy Father how to handle relations with the Orthodox. If he perceives this much unity between the two, then he has every right to plan masses that manifest this state of affairs, and like you said, he may know something we don't. If any of you personally don't feel this close and at one with your Orthodox brethren, that's your fault and not the Pope's, and maybe you need to pray for some extra grace, that the Lord might see fit to reveal exactly what kind of unity currently exists between the two. You know, you could even rejoice in the increase of unity instead of pouting in your respective corner because the Church is a little more complicated that you want it to be.
"I agree with the call to calm down a bit… maybe we could all 'rise above' some of the negativity just a little."
Emilio,
I find that your comments often reflect your discontent with others’ critiques and assessments. It is not being negative to point out items and aspects of the Mass which clash or could be more traditional. Many are infinitely grateful for what the Holy Father has done for the Church, and it is not complaining to point out things that can be improved. If the faithful are always "rising above", the Church will cease to improve. Telling people to calm down over what to you may seem like unimportant minutiae may be something others find very important. I am not meaning to be harsh or uncharitable, rather I am merely voicing a contrary opinion.
"Does my analysis make sense?"
Tobias,
Yes, it makes complete sense! It is as thought it is used to fill the void of the missing tiara... and fails. Good argument.
The new pallium is wonderful and it was a long overdue change. The cut is much more graceful compared to the awkward older one. It is great to see the statue of Saint Peter vested in cope and Mitre, as well as the horrendous podium removed from Maderno's confessio. Unfortunately, the rest was rather unimpressive to me. The golden statues of Saints Peter and Paul on the altar are backwards, the papal vestments were bland and austere, and the lack of a throne was a major disappointment. My critiques are by no means a reflection of ingratitude on my part, for I am extremely thankful for what the Pope has brought back to the Church. One could go on and on mentioning what he has restored to the liturgy. I suppose the two major things I hope to see change are the ugly obstruction of Bernini's baldacchino where the Pope's chair is currently placed (with the old throne reinstated to replace it) and the return of traditional Roman vestments. Oh, and the return of the tiara would be most welcome as well!
Also, does anyone know what happened to the beautiful old mantum that used to be placed on the bronze statue of Saint Peter and why a cope is now used instead?
Clint, thank you for your cslm and loving words. May we all take heed.
This is a superb celebration, and one of true beuty.
I think what gets the emotions flowing here is that some are confused as to why some things happen sometimes and not other times (ie- cardinal deacons, pontifical dalmatics) and, also, speculation as to what will be 'ressurected next.'
It is quite confusing, and one sometimes wonders, considering the wealth of knowledge found on this blog and through it commentators, what exactly 'the program is'and how much Marini actually knows about the old papal ceremonies. It seems it is very very slow moving and somewhat confused itself in some areas, but if we keep praying and supporting good liturgy in our seminarians things will change.
has anyone noticed that the concelebrations during the papal masses have become much smaller?
in another subject: I can already see and hear liberal priests allowing non catholics to give the homily at a mass and participate in mass and giving as a reason the example given by the Pope allowing the Patriarch give a homily/message and an orthodox deacon reading the gospel
The Pope did not wear a dalmatic today. I watched the event live and did not see it. What can be seen in the 4th photo is his stole. If you look at the 13th photo where the Pope's arms are raised you can clearly see he is not wearing a dalmatic. I wonder why?
I'm watching the re-broadcast on EWTN and it is very impressive. I had grat respect for John Paul II, but I have to say that I really love this pope. You cannot watch one of Benedict XVI's liturgical celebrations and not be warmed by this man's faith.
Why did the Orthodox clergy have their heads covered during the reading of the Gospel and the Consecration?
Re: the pontifical Dalmatic. There was excessive heat and dampness in Rome yesterday, and the Holy Father was sweating from the beginning. From what I have heard, it was also planned that he wear the chasuble of last Pentecost (which belongs to the set that was used Saturday evening at St. Paul-outside-the-Walls), but there was a last minute change.
FT,
I wondered the same thing. The Syriacs never uncover their heads, the same with the Copts and Ethiopians. I could only conjecture why the Orthodox Byzantines did not, but I really might be wrongly judging them.
Wow, some people seem to make it their number one priority to strain out gnats...A wonderfully beautiful Mass, Altar Arrangement, Sermon, Communion distributed kneeling and on the tongue (just think about that!!) and yet the first post moans about the placing of the pins.
Such pharisitical opinions do nothing to endear tradition or reform of the reform to 'ordinary' Catholics.
Pax.
JFelix,
you can find a picture of Archbishop Babjak newly invested with the pallium among the photographs of yesterday's Mass published today by Fotografia Felici here: http://www.fotografiafelici.com/...A&
n_page=6#foto
Archbishops traditional palliums look under my opinion much better & more elegant than Pope Benedict XVI's new one.
I don't see the connection between discussing details and being a Pharisee. It seems to me that the goodness of a liturgy can only be ensured by focusing on quality in the details. By actually thinking about them--using the critical faculties God gave us to help us to know and do His will--our own liturgical practices can become more beautiful and truthful.
No detail is too small, I'd say.
"Yes, plenty of them. If I am not mistaken these belong to the vestments which Bl. John XXIII had made for the II Vatican Council - dalmatics for the Cardinal Deacons, chasubles for the Cardinal Priests, and copes for the Cardinal Bishops. There also ought to be a papal chasuble to go with them."
Gregor, this chasuble of John XXXIII. is now in the museum dedicated to the Blessed in Sotto il Monte.
j. g. rathkaj,
I know there is one at Sotto il Monte, but I've heard it said that there were more than one. Don't know however.
I have seen some men wearing a white albe, red mozzetta and white gloves: http://bp2.blogger.com/
_71ZPiLxO...Paul2008+17.jpg
They carried the candles.
Does anyone know, who they are? I noticed them for the fist time.
Did anyone noticed that one of the papal MCs poured water and wine in the chalice AFTER the Pope offered it? If it means what I think, then the Pope offered an empty chalice. Oh dear! Be careful with these details, Don Guido, please.
I also noticed the faces of some of the new archbishops when the kneeler was been taken to the center of the nave for Communion with the Pope. Some looked as if they couldn't believe their eyes. It was pretty funny. Well, after they have seen this, I hope they follow the example in their own archdioceces.
Does anyone know who is the bishop dressed in choral who received the pallia that were not imposed personally on the missing archbishops? I have seen him in previous years. What is his charge?
Also, the torchbearers were dressed magnificently, with those red mozzettas and white gloves. Do they belong to a special group? I remember that it is custom in some places to dress the torchbearers with special elegance in Solemn Masses in the usus antiquior. Maybe this is another feature that will be part of Papal Masses from now on...
I was also curious to what religious community the servers belonged to, their choir dress was splendid. I echo Gustavo's point about the change to kneeling when receiving, and what effect it will have as the images reach the millions and millions of faithful around the world. It will no doubt challenge the authority of not a few bishop's conferences and their abusive policies.
And why was the Byzantine-rite archbishop invested with a Roman pallium, despite the fact that he would never use this when vested for Divine Liturgy in his tradition? It looked kind of silly, maybe it was an oversight?
During the distribution of communion, why do the two candle-holders have on red capes?
Yes, that's exactly my question.
Are they members of a brotherhood?
Ministi in special vestments?
Anyone here living in Rome, who can ask Msgr. Marini? ;-)
The most disturbing picture is of Archbishop Babjak receiving pallium while he is full vested with full omophorion. The pallium and omophor represent the same thing.
I think Rome should rethink the way of distributing pallium (or no pallium at all) for Eastern Catholic hierarch.
"The most disturbing picture is of Archbishop Babjak receiving pallium while he is full vested with full omophorion. The pallium and omophor represent the same thing.
I think Rome should rethink the way of distributing pallium (or no pallium at all) for Eastern Catholic hierarch."
I frankly cannot see why. The papal pallium has taken a different development, and more importantly a different meaning, than the eastern omophorion since at least the 6th century. They are two different things today. The pallium granted by the pope represents the communion with him and indeed the "plenitudo pontificalis officii". So why shouldn't it be worn together with the omophorion, which does not represent these things?
their insisting on not having the altar candles evenly spaced apart, as was always the custom, is a sign that they are still in their insanity.
Although there have been great improvements,,particularly knelling for communion and I am thankful, it was disappointing to see the terrible white chairs back. On the feast of St Peter and Paul the Papal throne should always be used. Also I am not happy with the 'equal' status granted to Orthodox Patriarchs when in Rome.
Also why has the carpet been removed from the steps of the high Altar.
The new pallium is far better as the original one looked cumbersome.
Can only hope for return of the Sedia.
Commenting by HaloScan
