And this is today's (June 29th) Papal Mass and Imposition of the Pallium on the New Archbishops for the Solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul, please note that the first Pope is wearing the Papal Tiara!
This is the homily Pope Francis preached for this great solemnity:
On this Solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul, the principal patrons of Rome, we welcome with joy and gratitude the Delegation sent by the Ecumenical Patriarch, our venerable and beloved brother Bartholomaios, and led by Metropolitan Ioannis. Let us ask the Lord that this visit too may strengthen our fraternal bonds as we journey toward that full communion between the two sister Churches which we so greatly desire.
“Now I am sure that the Lord has sent his angel and rescued me from the hand of Herod” (Acts 12:11). When Peter began his ministry to the Christian community of Jerusalem, great fear was still in the air because of Herod’s persecution of members of the Church. There had been the killing of James, and then the imprisonment of Peter himself, in order to placate the people. While Peter was imprisoned and in chains, he heard the voice of the angel telling him, “Get up quickly… dress yourself and put on your sandals… Put on your mantle and follow me!” (Acts 12:7-8). The chains fell from him and the door of the prison opened before him. Peter realized that the Lord had “rescued him from the hand of Herod”; he realized that the Lord had freed him from fear and from chains. Yes, the Lord liberates us from every fear and from all that enslaves us, so that we can be truly free. Today’s liturgical celebration expresses this truth well in the refrain of the Responsorial Psalm: “The Lord has freed me from all my fears”.
The problem for us, then, is fear and looking for refuge in our pastoral responsibilities.
I wonder, dear brother bishops, are we afraid? What are we afraid of? And if we are afraid, what forms of refuge do we seek, in our pastoral life, to find security? Do we look for support from those who wield worldly power? Or do we let ourselves be deceived by the pride which seeks gratification and recognition, thinking that these will offer us security? Dear brother Bishops, where do we find our security?
The witness of the Apostle Peter reminds us that our true refuge is trust in God. Trust in God banishes all fear and sets us free from every form of slavery and all worldly temptation. Today the Bishop of Rome and other bishops, particularly the metropolitans who have received the pallium, feel challenged by the example of Saint Peter to assess to what extent each of us puts his trust in the Lord.
Peter recovered this trust when Jesus said to him three times: “Feed my sheep” (Jn 21: 15,16,17). Peter thrice confessed his love for Jesus, thus making up for his threefold denial of Christ during the passion. Peter still regrets the disappointment which he caused the Lord on the night of his betrayal. Now that the Lord asks him: “Do you love me?”, Peter does not trust himself and his own strength, but instead entrusts himself to Jesus and his mercy: “Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you” (Jn 21:17). Precisely at this moment fear, insecurity and cowardice dissipate.
Peter experienced how God’s fidelity is always greater than our acts of infidelity, stronger than our denials. He realizes that the God’s fidelity dispels our fears and exceeds every human reckoning. Today Jesus also asks us: “Do you love me?”. He does so because he knows our fears and our struggles. Peter shows us the way: we need to trust in the Lord, who “knows everything” that is in us, not counting on our capacity to be faithful, but on his unshakable fidelity. Jesus never abandons us, for he cannot deny himself (cf. 2 Tim 2:13). He is faithful. The fidelity which God constantly shows to us pastors, far in excess of our merits, is the source of our confidence and our peace. The Lord’s fidelity to us keeps kindled within us the desire to serve him and to serve our sisters and brothers in charity.
The love of Jesus must suffice for Peter. He must no longer yield to the temptation to curiosity, jealousy, as when, seeing John nearby, he asks Jesus: “Lord, what about this man?” (Jn 21:21). But Jesus, in the face of these temptations, says to him in reply: “What is it to you? Follow me” (Jn 21:22). This experience of Peter is a message for us too, dear brother archbishops. Today the Lord repeats to me, to you, and to all pastors: Follow me! Waste no time in questioning or in useless chattering; do not dwell on secondary things, but look to what is essential and follow me. Follow me without regard for the difficulties. Follow me in preaching the Gospel. Follow me by the witness of a life shaped by the grace you received in baptism and holy orders. Follow me by speaking of me to those with whom you live, day after day, in your work, your conversations and among your friends. Follow me by proclaiming the Gospel to all, especially to the least among us, so that no one will fail to hear the word of life which sets us free from every fear and enables us to trust in the faithfulness of God. Follow me!
20 comments:
The dark-haired priest distributing communion at 1:38 is our parish priest, Fr. Peter Sharrocks!
I'm not a fan that he bought it back. It makes sense to wear the red one when you don't have any other distinctive papal vestment. If the holy father was to restore the fanon to use it wouldn't matter, but he isn't going to be doing that, I think
I think the Holy Father was making the point that he is a metropolitan amongst his peers. The fact that only he can confer the pallium is significant. What I did notice, however, was that the reliquary statues of SS Peter and Paul were not on the altar. The trend towards liturgical minimalism, exemplified in the reign of Paul VI, seems set to continue.
Also, the tradition in Rome of Communion on the tongue seems to have gone by the board. Still, apart from the customary annoyances (the dreadful Italian responsorial psalm replacing the Gradual is one of my pet hates) and the pointless polyglot intercessions, it wasn't bad, and the HF used the Roman Canon.
As per last year there was a polyphonic Credo (Palestrina, Missa Papae Marcelli). This is interesting, since in most places where polyphonic settings of the Ordinary are commonplace, the Credo is almost always in chant (usually Credo III).
Where is the Holy Father digging up these vestments? There's no way Msgr. Marini is picking them out. I'm usually not one to complain about the particulars but it seems like Pope Francis is intentionally wearing plain, ugly, unworthy vestments.
I'm glad he restored the "old" pallium. The version worn by Benedict XVI always looked a little sloppy. It didn't drape over the shoulders smoothly and looked unkept.
Luke - What makes a plain vestment "unworthy"?
PI - I believe there is a difference between plain and simple. I actually prefer simple "Gothic" style vestments with a tau or cross design. See below for many examples. I have learned a great deal about vestments from the St. Bede Studio blog.
http://saintbedestudio.blogspot.com/
Watching the video of the Holy Father the vestments look a little better. The pictures did not do them justice. I just don't understand while all these new vestments are being made when there are plenty of beautiful old ones in various styles in St. Peter's sacristy.
It was a beautiful mass and homily however and I should have stated that before any criticisms.
I hear more and more and more people refer to this pope as, "Francis, the hobo pope."
Now we know why. He does dress rather shabbily and it shows. KInd of sad if you ask me. Is it Catholic teaching to equate nice cloths as somehow sinful? I have to wear a suit when I go to special events, is that so bad?
Didn't Jesus tell a parable about some people who were thrown out of a banquet for refusing to dress up for the banquet they were invited to?
Although Luke did not say the vestments are "plain, ugly and therefore unworthy", but rather that they are simply each of the three, I think we can assume he sees a connection between a sacred vestment being plain and it being unworthy. I also suspect we can all easily discern the reason for this assertion. Indeed, who doesn't see that something ornate is more highly valued over something plain? Platonism, with its disregard for things tangible, does continue to militate against this natural perspective, however.
Benedicts Pallium - (the one resting on one shoulder) was ancient in style - around 4 -8th century.
When we have our world not knowing right from wrong, when so many people, even those in the pews, do not know what is morally acceptable to God, it seems trivial to me to put much thought into what kind of pallium is worn. The only thing a priest, bishop, pope or Born-Again child of God should wear is the "righteousness" of Christ, and sleeves that can be rolled up, equipped to work in the trenches that is our world.
"When we have our world not knowing right from wrong, when so many people, even those in the pews, do not know what is morally acceptable to God, it seems trivial to me to put much thought into what kind of pallium is worn. "
Oh stop being such a kill joy. Of course the pallium isn't the most important thing in the world, but the symbolism is beautiful as is the tradition. What's wrong with a little diversion from abortion, and all the -isims etc? Catholicism is rich in symbolism and tradition, it has always employed all the senses, and their isn't anything wrong with that. Beautiful liturgy is a major part of being a Catholic, no act of charity can equal the efficacy of the Holy Mass. And we should have the best for the worship of God, not because He needs it but because we do.
JBS - Being ornate doesn't make a thing, including a chasuble, more "highly valued." Nor does being ornate render a thing more beautiful than less ornate examples.
There can be great beauty in simple things such as a hand crafted silver chalice without filigree, chasing, jewels, or engraving. A single iris in a small vase, ikebana style. A decent pour of Auchentoshan low-land, single malt Scotch in a glass.
On the other hand, florid decorations can be distracting and cheap looking. They can be seen as ostentatious and inelegant.
I don't find plain vestments "unworthy" in any sense. If they are well made - especially if they are hand made - there is great beauty present.
A rustic stone church building can be every bit as worthy as a rococo masterpiece.
PI - I'm with you on the Auchentoshan.
Instead of all those silly comments about the Papal pallium and the character of Pope Francis, please pray an Our Father a Hail Mary and a Glory be for the disgrace we are suffering in our own country. Particularly for the lack of courage of many Catholics to defend our own Church and our own Faith.
But PI, if _everything_ is simple beauty surrounded by a bland background, then liturgy just becomes nothing more than museum aesthetics. I recall it was you who recently spoke about a little painting in its own plain room, yes, in a museum?
Why does everything have to be Baroque or boring?
Why can't we have balance? It's really not hard.
We have some Brocade Babies who can't get it that not everything has to be florid. We have others of the polyester poncho variety who are utterly afraid of symbolism and decoration altogether.
Why can't we have some balance? A proper and good aesthetic should usually not be polarized.
I don't think everything needs gold bullion trim and a flower brocade, but I'm not afraid of those things, either.
Simple can be beautiful, ornate can be beautiful. So what? That's not the point.
I rather think the point is how we help ideologues who hate anything that doesn't look like either paisley wallpaper on the one hand or absolutely nothing on the other.
PI I request that you try a chasuble with a nice trim and a tau design. Maybe even a tau made of a brocade!
I think the same pallium would work better with red crosses...to distinguish the Pope, since strictly speaking he's not wearing any vestments that distinguish him from any other metropolitan. (I still do not like the JPII/Paul VI Ferula)
In Eastern Theology, the Pope is more a father figure, but the metropolitans are the head of the church. that is to say the emphasis is on the soveirgnty of the local Bishops. This does not take away from the headship of the Church that the Pope has though.
As far as Pope Francis' vestments. Not my style, but not hideous either...(I perfer the Ruthenian style).
Happy Solemnity of Ss Peter and Paul to all of you.
Cameron - Thanks, but no brocade for me.
The chasuble is, itself, a symbol, as is the color. I think that adding other symbols is somewhat redundant. Decorations such as the tau, images of saints, galloon trimming, etc., don't enhance the symbol.
The vestments I wear are elegant and simple - a simple pattern is woven into the fabric, giving them a somewhat muted "eye appeal."
I've always preferred to see vestments (Gothic or Roman and whether they have images or symbols or not) that are bound on the edges with gold (galloon?) bindings. It is especially nice when the stole (the ones with the flared ends are especially nice) are bound with the same gold outline with simple little crosses at the center back and on the ends being in gold (the crosses often being made from the same gold binding tape). This little bit of gold trim contrasts with and "sets off" the main vestment color--even if it is violet (some people would say it just "pops").
I never could understand why the Orthodox seem to have retained their more ancient or historical looking vestments (which often look quite rich and beautiful) while the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church(at least OF of the Latin Rite, that is) has largely adopted much more bland "modern" vestment styles. At least among many of the younger clergy, it appears that the older, more beautiful, traditional styles seem to be making a comeback.
Post a Comment