Jonathan R. Baker;61406 wrote:
I agree. The initial version seems imbalanced, whereas the second one fixes that problem. Also, I don’t think it very likely to be confused for a marshalled achievement.
Neither would the first version.
Don’t get me wrong. I see things in the first version that I would amend, but I think the second version, excellently presented as it is, is more complicated than necessary. It is not up to me to decide on appropriateness. I just prefer the simpler version, and quartering is not simple.
What do folks think of a bishop changing the arms of his diocese?
As far as I know, he has the authority to do that. While it might seem odd to change the arms of so stable an entity as a diocese, in some cases it would be a mercy. When a friend of mine was appointed bishop of a diocese with particularly dreadful arms (Steubenville, OH), I gently urged him to do his new flock a favor and clean up the diocesan arms. He declined (perhaps wisely), but what do others think of the idea?.
Dohrman Byers;61465 wrote:
What do folks think of a bishop changing the arms of his diocese?
Well…. it depends…
If it’s an old enough diocese with well known arms (however ugly), then I wouldn’t think it’s a good idea.
If the arms were never or very seldomly used or are very new, then I don’t see an issue.
Of course, how one defines "old", "new", "infrequently used", and "ugly" are an entirely different matter.
Dohrman Byers;61465 wrote:
What do folks think of a bishop changing the arms of his diocese? [...] When a friend of mine was appointed bishop of a diocese with particularly dreadful arms (Steubenville, OH), I gently urged him to do his new flock a favor and clean up the diocesan arms. He declined (perhaps wisely), but what do others think of the idea?.
IMHO it is a pity that HE declined the proposal. Bad things are to be corrected. As to bad traditions, this principle is as true as ever (I say this as a stubborn traditionalist 
.
I don’t know—these arms are kind of like Wagner’s music as described by Mark Twain ("It’s better than it sounds.") Too complicated, but at least they’re heraldic—and no worse than some of the stuff produced by a couple of official heraldic authorities one might name between roughly 1600 and 1950.
http://home.catholicweb.com/diosteub/images//armssheldon.jpg
As blazoned on the diocesan website:
Per fess Azure and Argent on a fess per pale Argent and Azure a bend Gules, in chief a heart Argent charged with a rose Gules above a crescent Argent and in base a Torteaux charged with a celestial crown Or, on the circlet of the crown the letters I H S Sable, between three tongues of fire two in fess and one in base Gules.
The otherwise nice touch of working Baron von Steuben’s arms in as the fess is largely responsible for the complexity of the design. There was probably a better way to do this, but I’ve seen worse. (And they would look less cluttered on a full shield without the bishop’s personal impalement.
Bishop Sheldon’s arms (which are very attractive): Per chevron Argent and Gules, in chief a Hurt charged with a terrestrial globe Or between two Ermine-spots, and in base a cross of Lorraine Or.
http://www.diocese.nelson.bc.ca/images/coat_of_arms.gif
From the diocesean website http://www.diocese.nelson.bc.ca/ the arms of the Bishop of Nelson, BC (Canada) John Corriveau, OFMCap. Appointed on 30 November 2007, ordained on 30 January 2008 and installed the day after.
The arms of Bishop Salvatore Matano, succeeded as Bishop of the Diocese of Burlington (VT) 9 Nov 2005.
http://www.vermontcatholic.org/BishopMatano/MatanoCoatArms.jpg
Quote:
The Most Reverend Salvatore R. Matano’s motto is drawn from Saint Paul’s Letter to the Ephesians, where he calls for all God’s people to live, work and worship together “In Unitatem Fidei” … “In the Unity of Faith:”
From http://www.vermontcatholic.org/BishopMatano/CoatOfArms1.htm.
Is there a term for the cross moline device there?
Arms of the Most Rev. Manny Cruz who will be ordained Auxiliary Bishop of Newark on Sept. 8th.
well, not bad, but feels rather unimaginative IMO. i could be wrong.
Perhaps Bp. Cruz doesn’t care about heraldry? In such a case it would be easy to see how an unimaginative design would come to light. Also, keep in mind that Deacon Sullivan doesn’t do any design work. He simply has too many commissions for that. Rather, he asks his clients to come up with something themselves and then Deacon Sullivan simply renders it. So, maybe Bp. Cruz had some poor advice? Being that he is in NJ I did offer my services but never received a reply.
Two things that I can say in its favor are that it is very simple and clear and that if it ever needs to be marshalled with the arms of a diocese someday (if Bp. Cruz is made a diocesan bishop) they will do so nicely. Given that Bp. Cruz is Latino and only 54 years old the chances are very good that he will not remain an auxiliary bishop forever.
Is "M" for Mary?
I like the arms.
Yes, it’s for "Mary"...not "Manuel".
gselvester;63075 wrote:
Perhaps Bp. Cruz doesn’t care about heraldry? In such a case it would be easy to see how an unimaginative design would come to light. Also, keep in mind that Deacon Sullivan doesn’t do any design work. He simply has too many commissions for that. Rather, he asks his clients to come up with something themselves and then Deacon Sullivan simply renders it. So, maybe Bp. Cruz had some poor advice? Being that he is in NJ I did offer my services but never received a reply.
Two things that I can say in its favor are that it is very simple and clear and that if it ever needs to be marshalled with the arms of a diocese someday (if Bp. Cruz is made a diocesan bishop) they will do so nicely. Given that Bp. Cruz is Latino and only 54 years old the chances are very good that he will not remain an auxiliary bishop forever.
You’re probably right that maybe he doesn’t care about it or got advice from someone close to him who gave him poor advice. Too bad you never got a reply, as I know it would’ve been leagues better than what is here (not that it’s bad, just boring).
I also agree that they are at least simple and clear and he will probably move on from an auxiliary position (hopefully he will and hopefully he will one day revisit his armorial design in the future).
I did not know that Deacon Sullivan did not design as well. Thanks for that heads up. I honestly just thought that he was bored with this one and/or that the armiger was too vague with what he wanted and why. Now I know better.
http://www.galwaydiocese.ie/images/Bishop-Crest.gif
Arms of Martin Drennan, DD Bishop of Galway (Ireland).
On the diocesean web site the Arms is explained as thus:
"The coat of arms draws attention to aspects of the joy of our Christian identity. In the centre is the Bible, opened at the beginning of the Gospel of John. The word of God offers a continual reminder to Christians of their deepest identity.
The fleur-de-lis at the top left is a symbol of the Blessed Virgin who grasped the full implications of her dignity as someone chosen and loved by God.
The Celtic Cross on the right is a reminder of our history and links with generations of Irish people who have gone before us.
At the bottom is a flowering blackthorn, making a connection with the family name Drennan (Ó Draighneáin)."
Would you call that partition per pall, reversed and abased?
