Bishop’s Arms

 
gselvester
 
Avatar
 
 
gselvester
Total Posts:  2683
Joined  11-05-2004
 
 
 
22 June 2006 23:46
 

Most rev. Donald W. Wuerl installed as Archbishop of Washington on June 22.

http://excoboard.com/forums/18883/user/133625/185205.gif

 
Donnchadh
 
Avatar
 
 
Donnchadh
Total Posts:  4101
Joined  13-07-2005
 
 
 
23 June 2006 12:53
 

That’s nice.

 
Marcus K
 
Avatar
 
 
Marcus K
Total Posts:  3368
Joined  06-05-2005
 
 
 
24 June 2006 17:04
 

gselvester wrote:

Most rev. Donald W. Wuerl installed as Archbishop of Washington on June 22.

http://excoboard.com/forums/18883/user/133625/185205.gif


The arms of the Archdiocese seems to have changed, previously the cross was made up of golden chains. Do you know anything about this Father Guy?

 
gselvester
 
Avatar
 
 
gselvester
Total Posts:  2683
Joined  11-05-2004
 
 
 
24 June 2006 20:07
 

Theodore Cardinal McCarrick changed the design of the coat of arms of the archdiocese a few years ago, as was his perogative. He felt the chains were evocative of slavery which was insensitive in an archdiocese with a large black population. They were actually a symbol of the union that is led from the federal city…but there you have it.

 
ESmith
 
Avatar
 
 
ESmith
Total Posts:  550
Joined  15-11-2005
 
 
 
24 June 2006 22:25
 

This has probably already been explained… but why does it seem like a lot of Bishop’s divided per pale?  Is one side the diocese and the other their own?

 
Stuart
 
Avatar
 
 
Stuart
Total Posts:  230
Joined  01-12-2005
 
 
 
24 June 2006 22:54
 

Yes, the Dexter, the Diocese; the Sinister, the Bishop.

 
Marcus K
 
Avatar
 
 
Marcus K
Total Posts:  3368
Joined  06-05-2005
 
 
 
25 June 2006 05:47
 

gselvester wrote:

Theodore Cardinal McCarrick changed the design of the coat of arms of the archdiocese a few years ago, as was his perogative. He felt the chains were evocative of slavery which was insensitive in an archdiocese with a large black population. They were actually a symbol of the union that is led from the federal city…but there you have it.


Thank you Father Guy for clearing that out.

 
Donnchadh
 
Avatar
 
 
Donnchadh
Total Posts:  4101
Joined  13-07-2005
 
 
 
25 June 2006 15:40
 

Good father - I hope I’m not being disrespectful here and please let me know if I am and I’ll apologize - but even though it is his prerogative I dare say as a layman (both religious and heraldic) I am rather put off by the idea of anyone changing the arms of a diocese for minor, I dare say ignorant, or at least naive, reasons without regard to the real, legitimate historical reasons for them. I hate revisionism when it comes to such things and while I always try to be accepting of everyone et al, I find it completely ridiculous to have changed them for that reason when it has no basis in historical fact.

Now had the good bishop changed it for other reasons, like say he wanted the cross to be clearer, I still might not like it, but at least I could see logical, honest intelligent reasoning behind it. The reasons mentioned above lead me to believe that he simply changed it because a small group of people objected to it who themselves did not understand the significance of it and displaced their own feelings of…well I won’t go there…but I find this a terrible thing to do.

 

What’s next? Will a future bishop come in and remove the cross from the arms all together because he doesn’t want to offend anyone who objects to Christian symbols (we already seen this sort of iconoclasm in our Catholic universities in the 70s, 80s and 90s and are only now seeing a general reversal of such nonsense)? I mean…seriously where does it end? And when it comes to heraldry I find it very troubling to see people changing arms for contemporary politically correct reasons - especially when those reasons bear no merit in historical reality.

 

If every armiger, or administrator of an armigorous institution, simply changed the arms at their fancy upon every/any fanciful whim, well, I dare say a significant reason for heraldry will have been lost! And I find that to be a great shame!!

 

OK good father…I’m off my soapbox…please let me know if I’ve crossed the line…

 

P.S. That all being said I do like the design of the arms…I just worry about this sort of tampering being contagious – first one sees His Holiness messing up his own arms (IMHO) and now this – where does it end?

 

OK, now I’m off my soapbox.

 
gselvester
 
Avatar
 
 
gselvester
Total Posts:  2683
Joined  11-05-2004
 
 
 
25 June 2006 16:55
 

Your point is well taken but, basically, that’s life. Yes, any bishop may change his diocese’s arms. My own bishop changed the arms of my diocese several years ago. It used to contain a black cross and a black letter "M". I suggested those be changed to blue and he agreed and (*poof*) it was done. I will give Cardinal McCarrick credit for at least taking the step of making the changes in consultation with the archdiocese’s college of consultors. ( a body of priests of the diocese who assist the bishop in the diocese’s governance) He didn’t make the decision on his own and impose it on everyone without asking for feedback first.

In addition, the inclusion of the cross botonee alludes to the archdiocese of Baltimore from which the archdiocese of Washington was created. So the change is somewhat heraldically motivated.

 

The why’s and wherefore’s are immaterial to me. It happened, period. As to the motivation behind it I don’t think it matters that much. Sometimes coats of arms are changed.

 
Donnchadh
 
Avatar
 
 
Donnchadh
Total Posts:  4101
Joined  13-07-2005
 
 
 
25 June 2006 17:24
 

Thanks father. I accept like you said, as it is done and over with and we can’t go back and change it. Plus, religious heraldry may be more fluid than personal heraldry (or it may not I’m not the expert and leave that open to your correction).

Can I expand this to heraldry in general here, or, should I start a new thread for that?

 

Here’s where I’m going with it: why would someone want to change the arms that have been handed down to them?

 

For me, at least, one of the great appeals of heraldry is that it is an artistic (pictorial) biography (some would say resume) of the person, or, corporation be it commercial, civil or religious.

 

My arms were made under the guidance of my dad and uncle and in memory of my granddad. My children and grandchildren - if I ever have any - will inherit those arms. For me, as indeed for them, this says in addition to other things, ‘I am the son of ... who is the son of…’ etc. Who we are is in part determined by who we come from and where we come from as well as life’s twists and turns that shape us through our experiences. I would hate for my future kids and grandkids to change that for whatever reason. I would hope they would embrace who they are by embracing who and where they come from.

 

But, under this idea of changing arms, one could reasonable presume that future generations may well change that based off of whatever reason that seemed right at the time. In doing this they - IMHO - break with the past in a very real way and I find that sad and even contra to heraldry as it has developed (again your knowledge of this may be able to correct this idea if it is wrong).

 

Now maybe I’m reading too much into the idea of people in future generations changing the arms that were created before them. If so, well, sorry about that, but as a student of history and art I have to say it is dangerous for people to break with their past; certainly as much as we Americans seem to do.

 

—- let me know if I should delete this and move it to another thread, thanks—

 
Scotus
 
Avatar
 
 
Scotus
Total Posts:  322
Joined  13-05-2005
 
 
 
26 June 2006 06:06
 

Donnchadh wrote:

Thanks father.

...doing this they - IMHO - break with the past in a very real way and I find that sad

 

Think of it like names. You broke with the past when you changed the spelling of the name given you in baptism, as well as the last name handed on to you by your father. You did that because it was important to you; however, it was a break from the past. Arms would be similar. In the case of a bishop, if he feels the change is important, he is free to make it. The pope, for another example, does not bear the same coat of arms he had as Cardinal Ratzinger.

 
Donnchadh
 
Avatar
 
 
Donnchadh
Total Posts:  4101
Joined  13-07-2005
 
 
 
26 June 2006 14:29
 

Thanks Father Archer. I can see your point and accept it. I don’t really like it, but I can see it.

As for me, however, I think you are right about the name my mom gave me – although all I did was make it the Irish version of the same great French saint (Donnchadh=Dennis in Irish/English) and not change it from Dennis to say Hank. And I actually reunited with the past after it was broken by socio-political circumstances by changing my name back to its original; which it always should have been, but for the pressures that the Irish had from the English to break the Gaelic ways (my family, as my granddad said to my dad, changed its spelling of the name from mag Eochadha to McGoff/MacGoff when the English suppressed the Irish language in the later part of the 19th century – an aside my granddad still spoke broken Irish that he learned from his father and so on, so my learning Irish in classes today and employing it in my life is just me going back to the historical perspective). So, you see, in this way I am reuniting with the past for what always was and always should have been, not the other way around.

 

That tid-bit aside I do recognize the point both you and Fr. Guy made and I accept it – I just think it can be very dangerous to always be in a state of ‘I can change this for reason “x,” “y,” or “z” because the times they are always ‘a changin’.

 

Plus I have to admit it does look good and it is a nice tie in with Baltimore, as Fr. Guy mentioned.

 
gselvester
 
Avatar
 
 
gselvester
Total Posts:  2683
Joined  11-05-2004
 
 
 
06 July 2006 13:57
 

Arms of Cardinal Backis of Vilnius, Lithuania.

http://excoboard.com/forums/18883/user/133625/188936.jpg

 
Donnchadh
 
Avatar
 
 
Donnchadh
Total Posts:  4101
Joined  13-07-2005
 
 
 
06 July 2006 17:01
 

I really like those arms Fr. Guy.

 
Guy Power
 
Avatar
 
 
Guy Power
Total Posts:  1576
Joined  05-01-2006
 
 
 
06 July 2006 18:59
 

gselvester wrote:

Arms of Cardinal Backis of Vilnius, Lithuania.


Very nicely emblazoned, Fr. Guy.  Do the roundels have a particular meaning?  Some sort of Lithuanian badge or Livery?  I see the "cross of Loraine" is tied to Lithuania

http://www.vexilla-mundi.com/vilniaus_flag.png

www.vexilla-mundi.com/lithuania.htm

 

But what about the "per pale Gules and Sable"?

 

 

—Guy (too)

 
gselvester
 
Avatar
 
 
gselvester
Total Posts:  2683
Joined  11-05-2004
 
 
 
06 July 2006 22:17
 

I don’t know. The double-bar or patriarchal cross (I seriously doubt it would be called a "cross of Lorraine" by the Lithuanians) is depicted in the state arms on the shield of Vytis.