Bishop’s Arms

 
Joseph McMillan
 
Avatar
 
 
Joseph McMillan
Total Posts:  7658
Joined  08-06-2004
 
 
 
10 September 2008 13:13
 

I’d call it "Per fess…. and on a point Or ..."

 
gselvester
 
Avatar
 
 
gselvester
Total Posts:  2683
Joined  11-05-2004
 
 
 
11 September 2008 02:19
 

gselvester;60303 wrote:

Today Bishop Fran Malooly, an auxiliary bishop of Baltimore was named IX Bishop of Wilmington, Delaware. His personal arms are obvioulsly based on those of the Archdiocese of Baltimore. It should be quite an interesting achievement when these are impaled with the diocesan arms of Wilmington.


And here is how it ended up:

 

http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/2510/pixmaloolyshieldgf5.jpg

 

I don’t know who did the artwork but it looks like someone borrowed the basic style of the galero, cords, cross and scroll from Sullivan’s style and the tassels from the late A. Phelps’ style. We have discussed before the differences between being inspired by the style of another artist and just flat out stealing from them. Overall its a good coat of arms and, as I suspected, the two coats of arms combine well to make for an interesting and attractive achievement. Each coat of arms is actually rather simple but the repetition in each design (crosses, couterchanging) makes them seem complex. There’s a lot to look at on that shield but it still isn’t too "busy". The contrast in tinctures on each side of the shield is also good in my opinion. Considering the bishop designed his own arms (despite not being a heraldic enthusiast…he simply knew what he wanted) and the arms with which they are impaled was a matter of chance I’d say he ended up with a very happy combination.

 
gselvester
 
Avatar
 
 
gselvester
Total Posts:  2683
Joined  11-05-2004
 
 
 
14 September 2008 15:49
 

The Diocese of Oakland, California (which is across the bay from San Francisco) will be dedicating its new cathedral, the Cathedral of Christ, Our Light, this week. http://www.ctlcathedral.org/ In doing this they will be making the people of San Francisco very happy indeed because it will bring to an end San Francisco’s time as having the ugliest cathedral http://www.stmarycathedralsf.org/ in the Bay Area. (as an aside, in my opinion neither one has the ugliest cathedral in California because that distinction remains with Los Angeles http://www.olacathedral.org/ which has, in fact, the most ugly cathedral in Christendom, but I digress.)

While he is perfectly within his rights to do so apparently the Bishop of Oakland, the Most Rev. Allen Vigneron has decided that this occasion is an appropriate time to change his coat of arms. I suppose he thinks that a new cathedra (on which his coat of arms will be displayed) calls for a new coat of arms? In fact, the bishop’s personal arms will remain the same but the arms of the diocese are changing which is even more impactful. At first I thought that perhaps the old diocesan arms had a charge referring to the old cathedral’s patron, St. Francis de Sales which would explain making the change. However, that is not the case. I suppose someone who thinks that a new cathedral needs a new "logo" convinced him that now would be a good time to abandon the coat of arms the diocese has used only since 1962.

 

Here is Bishop Vigneron’s arms impaled with the older diocesan arms which allude to the name of the place, Oakland, and the gospel going to the whole world:

 

http://img60.imageshack.us/img60/2861/mlogoif5.gif

 

And here is the new version. It is engraved in this image so I do not know the tinctures for the diocesan arms. Clearly it contains a spreading oak tree. It also seems to have a star which I assume alludes to the new cathedral’s titular of Christ, Our Light. It also looks like there are symbols for St. Joseph, a square and a hammer. I do not know why. It often happens that the principal patron of a diocese is not the titular of the cathedral. Perhaps St. Joseph is the patron saint of the diocese?

 

http://img60.imageshack.us/img60/2429/2008090801crux10gt2.jpg

 
kimon
 
Avatar
 
 
kimon
Total Posts:  1035
Joined  28-03-2008
 
 
 
14 September 2008 17:01
 

I see he also made the base of the diocese’s new arms match his…

 
Doug Welsh
 
Avatar
 
 
Doug Welsh
Total Posts:  445
Joined  20-06-2008
 
 
 
14 September 2008 17:03
 

gselvester;63314 wrote:

The Diocese of Oakland, California (which is across the bay from San Francisco) will be dedicating its new cathedral, the Cathedral of Christ, Our Light, this week. http://www.ctlcathedral.org/ In doing this they will be making the people of San Francisco very happy indeed because it will bring to an end San Francisco’s time as having the ugliest cathedral http://www.stmarycathedralsf.org/ in the Bay Area. (as an aside, in my opinion neither one has the ugliest cathedral in California because that distinction remains with Los Angeles http://www.olacathedral.org/ which has, in fact, the most ugly cathedral in Christendom, but I digress.)

Fr. Guy, my wife and I agree, these three churches seem to be locked in a dead heat for that title of "Ugliest Cathedral in Christendom".


gselvester;63314 wrote:

While he is perfectly within his rights to do so apparently the Bishop of Oakland, the Most Rev. Allen Vigneron has decided that this occasion is an appropriate time to change his coat of arms. I suppose he thinks that a new cathedra (on which his coat of arms will be displayed) calls for a new coat of arms? In fact, the bishop’s personal arms will remain the same but the arms of the diocese are changing which is even more impactful. At first I thought that perhaps the old diocesan arms had a charge referring to the old cathedral’s patron, St. Francis de Sales which would explain making the change. However, that is not the case. I suppose someone who thinks that a new cathedral needs a new "logo" convinced him that now would be a good time to abandon the coat of arms the diocese has used only since 1962.

Many Churches seem to suffer, these days of modernist influence, from the same concept, that if something is older than 15 years, it must be changed and/or "redesigned" beyond recognition.  We Anglicans have made similar bad decisions.  :::sigh::::


gselvester;63314 wrote:

Here is Bishop Vigneron’s arms impaled with the older diocesan arms which allude to the name of the place, Oakland, and the gospel going to the whole world:

http://img60.imageshack.us/img60/2861/mlogoif5.gif

 

And here is the new version. It is engraved in this image so I do not know the tinctures for the diocesan arms. Clearly it contains a spreading oak tree. It also seems to have a star which I assume alludes to the new cathedral’s titular of Christ, Our Light. It also looks like there are symbols for St. Joseph, a square and a hammer. I do not know why. It often happens that the principal patron of a diocese is not the titular of the cathedral. Perhaps St. Joseph is the patron saint of the diocese?

 

http://img60.imageshack.us/img60/2429/2008090801crux10gt2.jpg

Well, He was a carpenter, and the Cathedral site does say "It is the new home of the former parish communities of St. Mary/St. Francis de Sales/St. Andrew/St. Joseph".  I also note that, whatever that glass panel shows, the original Arms of the Diocese as you have shown them above are the only Arms displayed on the Diocesan Website.

 
Jay Bohn
 
Avatar
 
 
Jay Bohn
Total Posts:  283
Joined  04-03-2008
 
 
 
18 September 2008 11:28
 

Here is an interesting use of heraldry by the Most Reverend John J. Myers, Archbishop of Newark (and now a science fiction author)

[ATTACH]530[/ATTACH]

 

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/09/meet_john_j_myers_catholic_lea.html

 
Michael Y. Medvedev
 
Avatar
 
 
Michael Y. Medvedev
Total Posts:  844
Joined  18-01-2008
 
 
 
18 September 2008 16:56
 

[QUOTE=Jay Bohn;63416[~~~]

Goodness gracious me, that is gorgeous.

 
Michael F. McCartney
 
Avatar
 
 
Michael F. McCartney
Total Posts:  3535
Joined  24-05-2004
 
 
 
22 September 2008 21:42
 

Well…generally I tend to share Fr. Guy’s taste in heraldry, but obviously that doesn’t carry over into architecture.  I haven’t seen (and the websites don’t show) enough of the Oakland & LA cathedrals to venture an opinion, but IMO the SF cathedral is one of the most impressive, inspiring and beautiful buildings I’ve had the pleasure of visiting— & nice heraldry above the archbishop’s throne! De gustibus & all that…

As for the old & new arms of the diocese of Oakland, I prefer the new ones—at least based on the artwork shown.  The glass engraving is gorgeous!

 
Kenneth Mansfield
 
Avatar
 
 
Kenneth Mansfield
Total Posts:  2518
Joined  04-06-2007
 
 
 
22 September 2008 22:07
 

I believe that’s cut metal.

 
 
Donnchadh
 
Avatar
 
 
Donnchadh
Total Posts:  4101
Joined  13-07-2005
 
 
 
23 September 2008 01:30
 

As to the Tres Fea (Three Uglies…I think my Spanish plural is correct there…any help there Daniel?), all three fail miserably in terms of inspiration…and rock-solid inspiration. As to the new one, glass structures never give one a feeling of being ‘solid’ because of the very nature and appearance of glass. To make a cathedral out of glass that looks like a post-modern bee-hive is, well, rather uninspired…hardly what one would expect from a cathedral. Oh well.

As to the new diocesan arms, I can’t tell if I like them or not in this glass etching. I agree with Kimon that it is highly likely that the new base will ‘fit’ well with the base of His Grace.

 

P.S. It is my opinion that every Catholic artist (don’t have to be Catholic, but in the sense of this thread) ought to read the wonderful book The Beauty of Holiness: Art, Sanctity, and the Truth of Catholicism, by Fr. John Saward, a noted British Catholic priest, before they begin work. Ironically he was on EWTN’s Journey Home tonight. I feel the same should be said to the bishops whose whims/decisions change the sacred beauty that points the world to Catholicism. This is why I am always so harsh on Catholic artists, architects, interior designers, liturgists, priests, or bishops who come up with either ugly architectural, sacred, or even heraldic art. ALL art within, around or otherwise giving nod to Catholicism should first and foremost give glory to God…many cathedrals/parishes and I dare say even coats of arms fail miserably in this regard IM not so HO.

 
Dcgb7f
 
Avatar
 
 
Dcgb7f
Total Posts:  516
Joined  07-07-2007
 
 
 
23 September 2008 11:43
 

Donnchadh;63495 wrote:

As to the Tres Fea (Three Uglies…I think my Spanish plural is correct there…

Tres Feas

(this just to add characters)

 
Donnchadh
 
Avatar
 
 
Donnchadh
Total Posts:  4101
Joined  13-07-2005
 
 
 
23 September 2008 11:55
 

Cool, thanks Daniel.

P.S. I’m sorry I haven’t mailed out your achievement yet. I have yours and Fr. Byers sitting in my out bin in my home office. I have been so busy with teaching, my own school work, and coaching football (we have 3 games this week alone!—Sat., Wed., & Sat.). Teaching and football take up almost all of my time…I did not know how much work this teaching would be. Anyway I’m sorry and I promise I will get it out.

 
Joseph McMillan
 
Avatar
 
 
Joseph McMillan
Total Posts:  7658
Joined  08-06-2004
 
 
 
23 September 2008 12:19
 

Donnchadh;63495 wrote:

As to the new one, glass structures never give one a feeling of being ‘solid’ because of the very nature and appearance of glass. To make a cathedral out of glass that looks like a post-modern bee-hive is, well, rather uninspired…hardly what one would expect from a cathedral. Oh well.


I don’t know about beehives, but it probably would have come as a surprise to Robert Suger that the objective of ecclesiastical architecture is to express solidity, rather than to convey an earthly impression of the divine light.  How unfortunate that the good abbot’s theory of the lux continua induced generations of architects to waste their time designing all those uninspired Gothic cathedrals that mar the landscape of northern Europe when they could have just kept building nice SOLID Romanesque churches.

 
Michael Swanson
 
Avatar
 
 
Michael Swanson
Total Posts:  2462
Joined  26-02-2005
 
 
 
23 September 2008 12:43
 

Joseph McMillan;63503 wrote:

...the objective of ecclesiastical architecture is to express solidity, rather than to convey an earthly impression of the divine light.


...thanks, Joe.  That explains all those huge mega churches (containing shops, gyms, restaurants, concert halls, and fallout shelters) in my neck of the woods, and why locals are abandoning those quaint buildings with steeples.  wink  Oh, you mean Roman Catholic architecture!  (Joe, I detect issues not related to the topic of this thread.)

 
Kenneth Mansfield
 
Avatar
 
 
Kenneth Mansfield
Total Posts:  2518
Joined  04-06-2007
 
 
 
23 September 2008 13:26
 

Donnchadh;63495 wrote:

As to the new diocesan arms, I can’t tell if I like them or not in this glass etching.


No seriously, guys. It’s cut metal sculpture.