Do you people think there’s a place for the phrase "cross diminished" in blazon separate from the sometimes-disparaged (more formerly than now and even then I don’t know why) "fillet cross"?  I think "fillet cross" should have been used instead here (ignore the infelicitous use of seals) but am open to a contrary argument.

I would agree, I’ve only ever seen a shield divided like that blazoned "cross fillet" or "cross fillet throughout".

What conceivable difference does it make?  It’s a crappy design, but don’t we know what was meant whether the cross is called diminished or fillet?

Joseph McMillan wrote:

What conceivable difference does it make?  It’s a crappy design, but don’t we know what was meant whether the cross is called diminished or fillet?

I think the difference is that "fillet" is more common than "diminished", so I’d see the use of the term "diminished" as just extraneous vocabulary in a field that is not lacking for such.

What an example!  The shoulder patch is simply gorgeous heraldry, while the coat of arms on the bagge is…well, Joe said it best…