CONTINUING LESSONS IN LITURGICAL WEAR
FROM POPE BENEDICT
Cross-post from POPE-POURRI:
Apropos the innovations in liturgical vestments for Pontifical events, there was an article in the UK ultra-liberal Catholc newspaper The Tablet in March 2008 that Father John Zuhlsdorf reprinted - and fisked - in his blog entry of March 8, 2008. For some reason, I missed both the particular blog and a reference to the Tablet article anywhere else.
Still, the points raised by the article continue to be very pertinent because the changes in liturgical practice being introduced gradually by the Holy Father obviously form part of a work in progress - what Father Z calls a 'brick by brick' restitution of the value of tradition in liturgy - Through, among other things, certain liturgical fine points that deserve to be preserved and manifested. Here is Father Z's March 8, 2008, blog entry on
wdtprs.com/blog/
======================================================================
FATHER KEITH PECKLER, S.J., ON BENEDICT XVI'S VESTMENTS
By Father John Zuhlsdorf
wdtprs.com/blog/
March 8, 2008
A probable ghost writer of the book with Mons. Piero Marini’s name on it,
A Challenging Reform, Fr. Keith Pecklers, SJ, has contributed a piece to the ultra-lefty
The Tablet.
Vested with symbolism
By Keith F. Pecklers, SJ
With reports circulating that the Pope has commissioned a set of vestments based on those worn by the first Medici Pope, Leo X, a specialist in liturgy examines the significance of the sartorial choices of Benedict XVI, who is clearly keenly aware of the messages embedded in the garments’ use.
A couple of years ago, when I was invited by the Serbian Orthodox Church to deliver several lectures at its Theological Institute in Belgrade, I had the occasion to meet privately with a small group of Serbian Orthodox bishops.
During our discussion, one of the senior bishops who has been compared to Joseph Ratzinger both for his theological acumen and linguistic ability raised the subject of Pope Benedict’s return to the ancient form of the pallium: "You have no idea what that has meant for us in the Serbian Orthodox Church," he said.
"As that form of the pallium comes from the first millennium before the tragic rupture of 1054,
we interpret this as a strong symbolic affirmation on the part of the Holy Father of his deep desire for the reunification of Christendom between East and West."
Like other elements within the liturgy, vesture is itself symbolic, and papal vesture, all the more so. Thus, the fact that Pope Benedict has shown a greater interest in what he wears than had his recent predecessors, raises questions not only about the particular style of vesture being donned, but also about the symbolic message that is communicated therein. [So far so good. I have been contending that Benedict XVI’s choice of vestments does in fact mean something, and it is part of his objective to shore up Catholic identity. Let’s see what Pecklers thinks.]
In his non-liturgical dress during papal audiences and processions, the Holy Father has restored use of the papal cape, or mozzetta, with its origins in the thirteenth century and last worn by Paul VI, made of red velvet, trimmed in ermine and lined with silk. He has also restored usage of the matching red velvet papal winter hat or camauro which has its origins in the twelfth century but was last worn by Pope John XXIII.
[Peckler's phrasing is ambiguous: It is not the use of the mozzetta per se that he has revived - in its most familiar form, red satin, that even John Paul II always wore at non-liturgical state occasions- - but the velvet ermine-trimmed winter mozzetta that Peckler describes, as well as later, after this article was writte,n, the white mozzetta for Eastertide, which apparently John Paul II never wore, but which was worn up to Paul VI.]
Within the context of liturgical celebrations, Pope Benedict has presided in a cope of Pope Pius IX, worn the mitre of Pope Benedict XV (reigned 1914-22) (also used by Pope Pius XII in the Holy Year of 1950 and last worn by John Paul I at the Mass to inaugurate his pontificate), and a mitre of (Blessed) Pope Pius IX (pope 1846-78) worn for the opening of Vatican Council I.
Pope Benedict has also used the elaborately carved wooden [4] papal throne of Pope Leo XIII (pope 1878-1903). On Ash Wednesday, the Pope presided at the Basilica of Santa Sabina on the Aventine Hill, wearing a chasuble which had been commissioned in the style of a vestment collection from the pontificate of the Borghese Pope Paul V (1605-21).
During the French Revolution many papal vestments had been burned in order to retrieve the gold woven into them. But two dalmatics remained from that collection of Paul V, and it was possible to reconstruct the pattern of the chasuble from the design of the dalmatics.
In recent weeks, reports surfaced that a set of 30 new vestments
[for the entire cappella Papale retinue not just for the Pope] had been commissioned for Palm Sunday, which would have found the Pope presiding in a chasuble whose design came from the pontificate of Pope Leo X (1513-21) but bearing Benedict XVI’s coat of arms. It now appears, however, that those vestments will be reserved for another occasion, perhaps the Feast of Pentecost.
The fundamental question, of course, is what do all of these sartorial innovations actually mean? Conservative blogs are rejoicing that these changes give a clear signal that the Pope is bent on rescuing the worship of the Roman Catholic Church from those of the past 40 years who nearly destroyed it.
They point to the changes that have been registered since the appointment last October of Mgr Guido Marini as the new Papal Master of Ceremonies: the placement of the cross and six candles on the papal altar; the return to the use of cardinal deacons who function in the role as liturgical deacons during papal celebrations vested in dalmatics and mitres; a return to the use of lace albs and surplices; the Holy Father’s celebrating Mass in the Sistine Chapel on the Feast of the Baptism of the Lord "ad orientem" – toward the east.
Critics of papal liturgies in the pontificate of Pope John Paul II lament the fact that the Pope was reduced to celebrating as if simply the bishop of any diocese – albeit on a grand scale – while
the Bishop of Rome is really a monarch and thus, papal liturgical celebrations should better express this.
[How calculated to sneak that completely unfounded bit! I might point that the originalTablet article is footnoted where convenient to cite Peckler's sourc,e but he has no footnote for this absurd, apparently fabricated claim!]
[Father Z's comment on the above: I think this may be unfair. I don’t recall seeing people in the blogosphere arguing that the Pope should have older things or specifically "papal" thing because he is also a monarch. I have certainly never argued that. As a matter of fact, I suggested that the Pope should celebrate a TLM as a regular pontifical Mass without trying to do all the old stuff requiring the papal court, etc.]
By contrast, in his motu proprio of 21 June 1968, "Pontificalia Insignia", Pope Paul VI sought to simplify and clarify the use of pontifical insignia for all
prelates linked to the Roman Pontiff.
[Taking Peckler at his word, it does not apply to the Pontiff himself!]
Conservative critics, then, see these changes in papal vesture as indicative of a wider papal liturgical reform under way. Perhaps they are correct, although the reality appears to be much more enigmatic and complex.
First, there is the personal style and taste of the Pope himself. Those who knew him well as Archbishop of Munich-Freising and then at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith attest to his extraordinary attention to detail and his impeccable taste – both personally and in his official liturgical functioning.
Like his brother Georg, Pope Benedict has a refined artistic sense which goes far beyond his talent as an accomplished pianist. His love of Gregorian chant, his nostalgia for the old liturgy – its artistic beauty and reverence – is clearly exhibited in his book
The Spirit of the Liturgy and to a certain extent also in his motu proprio of last July,
Summorum Pontificum, which granted permission for wider usage of the Tridentine Rite.
So the fact that we are seeing a return to the use of antique vestments and patterns or vestment styles of former centuries should not come as a complete surprise.
In the eleventh century when the chasuble came to be reserved for the celebration of Mass, it was ample and bell-shaped in its design. But by the thirteenth century it had become a more restricted garment so as to use less material and also be less cumbersome for the celebrant. That vestment’s style and measure was further reduced in the post-Tridentine period and especially in the eighteenth century, cutting off the sides of the chasuble and creating what came to be popularly called the "fiddle-back".
Thus, gradually, the Gothic penchant for the oval-shaped chasuble gave way to the less copious baroque vestment without sleeves which tended to be made with heavier, stiff brocades.
Clearly, Pope Benedict is well acquainted with the evolution of the chasuble and has particular reasons for choosing to adopt a liturgical style from one historical epoch as opposed to another. The vestments worn by the Pope on Ash Wednesday, along with the new set of vestments mentioned earlier, is a
via media between the more ample Gothic chasuble of the medieval period and the more limited Roman chasuble in the latter part of the baroque period.
It is much longer than the "fiddle-back" chasuble in the front, and its sides reach almost to the elbows. However, the vestment is similar to that later Roman model in its stole which widens at the bottom, and also in its elaborate decoration.
The Pope’s choice to adopt this particular style can also be interpreted as a
via media on a symbolic level – between proponents of the Tridentine Rite who associate the "fiddle-back" Roman chasuble as the only fitting garment for the celebration of Mass, and those who prefer the more ample Gothic style with its association with a style of worship closer to the new rite.
So there may be something more significant being communicated here on a symbolic level than a mere issue of liturgical style or taste, not unlike the strong symbolic message communicated by returning to a form of the pallium from the first millennium.
[Father Z's comment: I don’t think that most "proponents of the Tridentine Rite" see Roman style "fiddle-back" chasubles as the "only fitting garment" for Mass. That just isn’t right. There might be a slight preference in that direction, but I don’t find many people insisting on this point. They just want decent, beautiful vestments. However, the so-called "gothic" style, was indeed the darling, nearly the obsession, of some of the progressivists during and after the Liturgical Movement.]
To what extent are these liturgical changes being proposed by the Pope himself or by his new Papal Master of Ceremonies? I would suspect that it is a combination of the two. Clearly, given his strong liturgical tastes, if the Holy Father were not in agreement with what Mgr Marini had proposed, he would not grant his approval for the changes to be made.
The question, of course, is why return to one historical period and not another? Why, for example, choose styles and patterns from the sixteenth or seventeenth centuries rather than the older Gothic vestment styles of the medieval period? That remains an open question. Suffice it to say, however, that as this papacy proceeds we can expect further innovations in papal liturgical celebrations.
=====================================================================
The rest of Father Z's comment on Peckler's article, outside the fisks included above:
Pecklers is really defending the old Piero Marini style. The real heroes for Fr. Pecklers are H.E. Piero Marini and Paul VI who issued Pontificalia insignia.
What is subtle here is Pecklers’s careful use of the rhetorical device accumulatio. Fr. Pecklers doesn’t say anything wrong. He doesn’t go over the top in criticizing the Pope. He is careful not to say anything too negative, but the slow accumulation of subtle comments leaves you with a final impression by the time you get to the end of the piece: this is really beyond the Pope’s personal taste ("He happens to lke baroque vestments."), it is about aestheticism.
Critics of this Pope and of Summorum Pontificum will try to smear the whole issue with a sublte suggestion that this trad stuff is all rather precious, maybe not even manly.
This was done, for example, by Fr. Mark Francis, in the same issue of The Tablet. Francis is also one of the three editors of the book that came out under Mons. Piero Marini’s name, with Pecklers himself and John Page.
Still, Pecklers does point out that there may be something going on with these liturgical choices. He raises the question, "why return to one historical period and not another"?
It may be because of the nature of the period Benedict seems to be going back to: the counter-reformation, a period of transition, a bridge between the medieval and modern times.
When Father Z took note of the vestments worn by the Pope and his retinue on Pentecost Sunday, he explained more of what he meant by the last statement above:
BENEDICT XVI'S PENTECOST SUNDAY:
Again, a lesson through vestments
By Father John Zuhlsdorf
wdtprs.com/blog/
May 11, 2008
Papa was once again in 'taglio Filipino' vestments for the Holy Mass in the Basilica this morning.
What in Italian is called the "taglio filipino" is so named after St. Philip Neri, who is depicted in paintings in this type of vestments.
The third photo shows Benedict XVI first wearing this chasuble style last Ash Wednesday.
This is the style of vestment in use around the time of the Council of Trent, worn by figures such as St. Ignatius of Loyola.
It is emblematic of an age in the Church’s life, a period of Counter-Reformation, when there was an explosion of lay confraternities seeing to spiritual and corporal works of mercy at every level of society, simply and noble. It is a period of tremendous deepening of our understanding of the Blessed Sacrament and subsequent development of devotions, such as Exposition, Benediction, and increase in observance of 40 Hours, devotion to the Sacred Heart. This was an era of change in architecture, when the Roman baroque came into its own as an outward, concrete, plastic expression of the Church’s own self-understanding, her ecclesiology.
It was a time when the humanities were in harmony with theology.
This style of vestment is the first stage of development between the fuller "cloak" style chasuble of the Medieval period and the later Roman vestment, which is smaller and more squared in the back and front. for example, not only is the "Philip" style longer in front and back, and curved at the bottom, but it also comes farther down the shoulders than the modern Roman vestment.
Thus it is a concrete symbol of continuity between two great Catholic eras.
WDTPRS has asserted again and again that Papa Ratzinger is saying something through his vestments. He mixes them up a bit, but he keeps coming back to this important
taglio filipino. Some will try to brush this off, or relegate his choice to a matter of mere personal taste.
I say that
the very vestment is an icon of what Benedict is proposing: a hermeneutic of reform rather than of rupture. Benedict is signaling the great value of the period of the style vestment as well as the fact that it is a harmonious bridge between two fantastic periods of Catholicity. Benedict is healing the rupture that occurred in liturgy in many ways, with Summorum Pontificum, certainly, but also in the accoutrement of celebration, such as the placement of candles and the altar Cross.
=====================================================================
I wrote the following as post-script comments to the tripping incident because two of the photographs taken right afterwards called attention to the vestments. The right photo below shows the full pattern of the Pope's chasuble in the style of St. Philip Neri, as Father Z identified it.
To which I then added this:
5/12/08 P.P.S
Is this the Medici-pattern vestment set?
I do believe that these are the vestments patterned after the Medici Pope Leo X's garments from the early 16th century that were supposed to have been commissioned for last Palm Sunday. But the Palm Sunday vestments turned out to be different, and so the speculation was that the Medicean vestments would debut on Pentecost instead.
The story at the time described the Medici heraldic emblem as "three rings with a diamond point that are concentric and inscribed within a two-lobed leaf" and that is what the circular motifs look like. Also, that the material was rose silk damask with gold thread (though it looks more red than rose). And does the coat of arms at the bottom of the chasuble resemble this Medici emblem?
YES, BUT...
P.P.P.S. Tridentinum, liturgist Pietro Siffi's workshop that specializes in 'artistic' liturgical vestments, has confirmed that the Pentecost vestments were indeed decorated with the heraldic emblems of Leo X, and as reported last March, the fabric was woven after a sample of the silk brocade used in Leo X's inaugural vestments found at the Church of the Annunziata in Florence.
However, Siffi says the coat of arms on the chasuble and dalmatics (prominent in this full view where the Pope and his acolytes are seen from the back) is not the Medici, but the Barberini emblem at the base of the Bernini baldachin, but with the Barberini coat of arms replaced by Benedict's - although for some reason, Tridentinum uses the tiara rather than the miter (which is an innovation in Benedict's coat of arms).
We'll probably find a better picture that will show us the detail on the coat of arms at the bottom of the chasuble and dalmatics. I find this liberty (replacing the miter with the tiara) out of place. It is not then Benedict's coat of arms, even if all the other elements are right.
Siffi explains that anticipation in an Italian newspaper of the Medici-inspired vestments 'created some problems and the use of these vestments was delayed'.
He says that the shape of both the Ash Wednesday and Petnecost chasubles are patterned after a chasuble of St. Charles Borromeo kept in a church in Bologna.
He has something to say about critics who would berate the Vatican for running up some hefty 'tailors' bills' by commissioning vestments. He says, in effect, that quality has a price.
But I think, others like me have argued before that the cost of all these cannot be considerably more than the cost of commissioned vestments in the Novus Ordo style that also make use of silk and brocade and gold thread, and involve elaborate embroidery work.
Through the centuries, the Church has kept expert craftsmen occupied, profitably employed and creatively engaged in manual production of all the fine lacework, embroidery and other specialized crafts involved in making altar accoutrements and liturgical vestments - in the same way that stonecutters, masons, builders, carpenters, woodworkers, sculptors, painters, etc. found creative and practical employment in building and adorning the edifices that have been one of Christianity's most lasting contributions to mankind's cultural patrimony.
There is nothing wrong with the Church continuing to provide such opportunities.
One of the anecdotes Imelda Marcos loved to share was how, on her first visit to the Apostolic Palace to see Pope Paul VI, she was very surprised to see a familiar face in one of the anterooms - one she had not seen since they were schoolchildren together before the Second World War, though like most children, one who had no particularly distinguished traits anyone was likely to remember her by.
"Rosa," she said, "what are you doing here?" And her former schoolmate said humbly, "I work here. I embroider things for the Holy Father's use in St. Peter's. But I heard you were coming, so I asked to be here."
When Mrs. Marcos recounted this to her surviving school friends, everyone had the same thought that she had: "What an immense privilege to be able to serve the Lord in this way!" [The other big lesson in it, of course, is that everyone, no matter how seemingly undistinguished, has something special to offer.]
After hearing that anecdote, I have always remembered to pray for the Rosas of the world when I see anything beautiful or well-done in church.
Besides Pietro Siffi's
www.tridentinum.com/
another specialist in artistic lutrgical vestments is
saintbedestudio.blogspot.com/
======================================================================
Finally, this comment from a Dominican priest who reads Father Z:
...and let’s not forget that St Philip Neri is considered the Second Apostle of Rome, the Saint of Joy, and the scourge of all religiously pretentious churchmen! Sounds just a little like our current Holy Father, huh?
- Fr. Philip Neri, OP