This will cause evil members of the American hierarchy heartache, pontifical Mass celebrated at the seminary in New Orleans:http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2019/05/pontifical-mass-in-new-orleans-seminary.html#more
Francis is way too humble to allow magnificence to distract the peoples from himself.
I'd rather walk.....Speaking of "thrones", already talk up here in Georgia's "other diocese" as to who will replace Wilton Gregory, whose last official day up here was this past Friday. A deacon at my church in 30327 told me he is already packed up, house cleared and items up to Washington---while he visits Rome (Italy, not Georgia!) before his installation on May 22. Will the bishop of the state's "original diocese" come back to Atlanta? One of the auxiliaries? Someone "out of the blue"? Stay tuned!
Rumors abound south of the mason Dixon line in Georgia too! Ours is mentioned as archabishopabile.
Is Georgia's "Mason-Dixon" line the border between our state's two Catholic dioceses?!? If so, since the border follows county lines, it is not as straight as the one that separates Maryland and Pennsylvania.But one things we can probably agree with on the search for a successor: "They who know don't talk (about it), and they who talk don't know!"
With the Atlanta See soon to be vacant, maybe Vatican can look at creating "Diocese of Augusta". Why not? Doesn't the golfing capital of the world deserve its own see? The Atlanta Archdiocese has grown so much, it could use some "pruning" so to say---take Athens, Lake Hartwell area, Lake Oconee, maybe down to Dublin and Swainsboro. That would leave both diocesan bishops less ground to cover (especially Savannah given its wide territorial expanse). OK, not likely to happen---probably too small by conventional standards---but one can always dream! Bishop O'Hara dreamed of separating the state into two dioceses in the mid 1950s!
The elaborate ceremonial of the papal court cannot be resurrected; it was (rightly or wrongly) abandoned by Paul VI along with much of the court itself. The sedia gestatoria was used by Paul VI and JP I; it was JP II who declined to use it.Paul VI may have relinquished the ugly and ridiculously heavy triregnum with which he was crowned, yet he assumed his successor would be crowned. When JP I refused the coronation in 1978 a French newspaper published a cartoon of him wearing a saucepan on his head with the caption: Je suis un pape simple.The modern world does not do ceremonial. Only the Brits can still do it without its degenerating into comic opera, and the coronation of the next king will be a lot less elaborate than that of Elizabeth II in 1953.Even a traditionalist like Fr McDonald thinks the ceremonial of a Pontifical High Mass to be over-fussy. That's not to say it should be abandoned altogether, and it is making a comeback even in the Novus Ordo. However, I am not convinced that the reform of the 1960s, which allowed a bishop to sing Mass in an ordinary parish, was necessarily misguided. And I am as traditionalist as any.
John Nolan,Well said. The only justification in my mind for the sedia gestatorio is that the Pope is more visible to the throngs - although with PF that may no longer be an issue.
TJMSome thirty years ago I met a Roman whose family had for generations enjoyed the privilege of carrying the sedia gestatoria. When JP II dispensed with it they were somewhat disappointed.I'm surprised B XVI didn't reinstate it, rather than be pushed around on a wheeled platform.
Post a Comment