Bishop’s Arms

 
gselvester
 
Avatar
 
 
gselvester
Total Posts:  2683
Joined  11-05-2004
 
 
 
14 October 2008 23:44
 

Coat of arms of the Most Rev. Giuseppe Bettori the new archbishop of Florence, Italy:

http://img352.imageshack.us/img352/4587/stemmawebpd1.jpg

 
emrys
 
Avatar
 
 
emrys
Total Posts:  852
Joined  08-04-2006
 
 
 
15 October 2008 03:30
 

very nice arms

 
Marcus K
 
Avatar
 
 
Marcus K
Total Posts:  3368
Joined  06-05-2005
 
 
 
15 October 2008 07:29
 

Agree, he also makes an nice reference to his See City in using the Florentine Fleur-de-Lyses.

 
Dohrman Byers
 
Avatar
 
 
Dohrman Byers
Total Posts:  760
Joined  02-08-2007
 
 
 
21 October 2008 15:05
 

As already mentioned on the thread about RC diocesan arms, a coadjutor archbishop has just been named for the Archdiocese of Cincinnati. He will succeed the present archbishop when the latter retires, probably sometime next year. I just wanted to run by our experts my reading of the heraldic consequences of these events.

The new coadjutor archbishop, the Most Rev. Dennis M. Schnurr, has been serving as bishop of Duluth. As bishop of Duluth, he marshaled his personal arms with those of his diocese and ensigned them with the galero and cross of a bishop (green hat with 12 tassels and processional cross with single transverse arm).

 

If I understand matters correctly, he now/soon needs, not one, but two new emblazonments of his arms. (1) As coadjutor archbishop, he now should use only his personal arms (not marshaled with those of any see) adorned with the insignia of an archbishop (green galero with 20 tassels, and processional cross with two transverse arms). (2) When the present archbishop of Cincinnati retires and Archbishop Schurr succeeds him, then and only then may he marshal his personal arms with those of the archdiocese (ensigning them with the galero and cross of an archbishop).

 

It seems to me that there is also a third possibility. As metropolitan of the Province of Cincinnati, Archbishop Schnurr will eventually be given a pallium. As I understand it, if he wishes, he may display the pallium with his arms. (To date, the archbishops of Cincinnati have not done so.) Am I correct, however, that it would be improper for the archbishop to display the pallium heraldically before he has actually received it?

 

Experts: Please confirm or correct my ideas about what should happen here.

 
Dohrman Byers
 
Avatar
 
 
Dohrman Byers
Total Posts:  760
Joined  02-08-2007
 
 
 
27 October 2008 15:39
 

The new coadjutor archbishop of Cincinnati, the Most Rev. Dennis M. Schnurr, has approved the the version of his coat of arms that he will use in his new position. His personal arms were originally designed by Deacon Paul Sullivan, when Archbishop Schnurr became bishop of Duluth. The emblazonment of his arms as coadjutor archbishop that he has adopted was done by your humble servant.

http://img224.imageshack.us/img224/2518/schnurrcoadjutorld1.png

 
emrys
 
Avatar
 
 
emrys
Total Posts:  852
Joined  08-04-2006
 
 
 
28 October 2008 04:44
 

very nice picture the scroll reminds me of the designs of Heim

 
gselvester
 
Avatar
 
 
gselvester
Total Posts:  2683
Joined  11-05-2004
 
 
 
28 October 2008 11:38
 

Dohrman Byers;64035 wrote:

As metropolitan of the Province of Cincinnati, Archbishop Schnurr will eventually be given a pallium. As I understand it, if he wishes, he may display the pallium with his arms. (To date, the archbishops of Cincinnati have not done so.) Am I correct, however, that it would be improper for the archbishop to display the pallium heraldically before he has actually received it?

Experts: Please confirm or correct my ideas about what should happen here.


Father: very nice job on the archbishop’s arms. Your understanding of his heraldic needs are correct. However, with regards to your question about the pallium (quoted above) I would offer the opinion that even after he succeeds to the See and receives his pallium he should not, despite the choices of our current pope, display the pallium with his coat of arms. Opinions on this matter differ but I am of the firm opinion that the pallium should not be used as an external ornament in the achievement of a metropolitan archbishop. It is also not the usual custom here in the USA. In addition to the objection that I, and others, have on the grounds that it is unnecessary it is also difficult to incorporate it into the achievement well in a way that is aesthetically pleasing. This was Heim’s argument as well.

 

I see this as another case of something that is not forbidden but is still not recommended. It can be done but that’s not a compelling enough argument to justify that it should be done.

 

That’s my opinion anyway since you did ask.

 
Michael F. McCartney
 
Avatar
 
 
Michael F. McCartney
Total Posts:  3535
Joined  24-05-2004
 
 
 
28 October 2008 15:31
 

Fr. Guy:

"I see this as another case of something that is not forbidden but is still not recommended. It can be done but that’s not a compelling enough argument to justify that it should be done."

Sort of an armorial version of senior citizens, speedos & bikinis?

(or for that matter, me in a kilt—the sartorial version of "a gentleman is someone who can play the bagpipes, but doesn’t")

 

Sorry—silly mood today…

 
Dohrman Byers
 
Avatar
 
 
Dohrman Byers
Total Posts:  760
Joined  02-08-2007
 
 
 
28 October 2008 22:13
 

Yes, Ton, Heim inspired several aspects of this emblazonment. The placement of the hat below rather than above the cross was commended and sometimes used by him (Heraldry in the Catholic Church, p. 151 & Plate II 3).

Guy, I agree with you entirely. I hope the pallium never comes up; but the Holy Father having set a poor example in this matter, I wanted to be equipped with the correct information, in case it does.

 
David E. Cohen
 
Avatar
 
 
David E. Cohen
Total Posts:  359
Joined  08-02-2008
 
 
 
28 October 2008 22:51
 

Dohrman Byers;64094 wrote:

Yes, Ton, Heim inspired several aspects of this emblazonment. The placement of the hat below rather than above the cross was commended and sometimes used by him (Heraldry in the Catholic Church, p. 151 & Plate II 3).


Is this to signify the supremacy of faith over earthly religious hierarchy?

 
Dohrman Byers
 
Avatar
 
 
Dohrman Byers
Total Posts:  760
Joined  02-08-2007
 
 
 
28 October 2008 23:14
 

David E. Cohen;64095 wrote:

Is this to signify the supremacy of faith over earthly religious hierarchy?


Heim commends it merely for being aesthetically pleasing and more natural, since the cross is taller than a man. I like it for both aesthetic and theological reasons.

 

Aesthetically, when the cross is placed below the hat, a lot of space is left that usually gets filled in with elaborately looped cords. While this can be highly decorative, I prefer keeping the cords rather minimal, since they are the least important part of the achievement. (I also prefer very simple mantling, though I stand in awe of the decorative effects some artists can achieve with these scraps of cloth.)

 

Theologically, it strikes me as a bit irreverent to place one’s hat above the cross of Christ.

 
David E. Cohen
 
Avatar
 
 
David E. Cohen
Total Posts:  359
Joined  08-02-2008
 
 
 
29 October 2008 07:12
 

The aesthetic rationale is a good one.  In this case, the angular headgear which is your style leads the eye to the cross, giving a pleasing effect.  I also agree that it does seem odd to use a symbol of one’s religion as a hat rack.

 

A further question:  What is the meaning of the charges, especially the unbalanced scales charge, which has been emblazoned to be reminiscent of the Chi Rho?

 
gselvester
 
Avatar
 
 
gselvester
Total Posts:  2683
Joined  11-05-2004
 
 
 
29 October 2008 07:57
 

David E. Cohen;64099 wrote:

I also agree that it does seem odd to use a symbol of one’s religion as a hat rack.


But, that’s actually precisely what is depicted in these kind of coats of arms. We’ve come to stylize it over the years but the idea behind the original arrangement of the achievement’s depiction is that the shield, and hat are "hung" upon the cross. Here’s another example:

 

http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/662/sc00255775am5.jpg

 
David E. Cohen
 
Avatar
 
 
David E. Cohen
Total Posts:  359
Joined  08-02-2008
 
 
 
29 October 2008 10:22
 

Interesting, Fr. Selvester.  I do not question the heraldic tradition of the Catholic Church, and indeed, I like this emblazonment you just posted. But I approach heraldry from a non-Catholic, indeed a non-Christian perspective, so pardon my ignorance.  Though history would be completely different, and heraldry as we know it might not even exist, I wonder what the full achievement of a present-day Kohan Gadol might look like.

 
Michael Y. Medvedev
 
Avatar
 
 
Michael Y. Medvedev
Total Posts:  844
Joined  18-01-2008
 
 
 
29 October 2008 14:39
 

Dohrman Byers;64096 wrote:

Theologically, it strikes me as a bit irreverent to place one’s hat above the cross of Christ.

I would rather award the superiority to the position which is closer to the shield.

In fact, I think that both versions are equally acceptable.