The Coat-of-Arms is often thought of as reserved to the nobility. But this is simply not the case. According to Archbishop Bruno Heim, members of the middle class and peasantry were adopting armorial bearings as early as the Thirteenth Century. It is primarily the elements that surround the shield, those marks that indicate the rank or dignity of the bearer, that are regulated.
In the Catholic Church the art of heraldry is still very much alive. Some individuals and corporate bodies are actually required to have a coat-of-arms. In 1969 the Secretary of State for the Holy See, Amleto Giovanni Cardinal Cicognani, issued Ut sive sollicite, on the dress, titles, and coats-of-arms of Cardinals, Bishops, and lesser Prelates. This document detailed the marks that accompany the shield to designate the hierarchical rank of all clergy from the Pope to the parish priest. On the subject of deacons, however, Ut sive sollicite is silent. This is not surprising as at the time the permanent diaconate had not been restored and all deacons in the Church were those that were transitioning to the priesthood. Still, interest remains high so I offer this information for those deacons considering adopting their own insignia in the form of a coat-of-arms.
Many deacons have adopted the custom of the unadorned galero, or ecclesial hat as the mark of a deacon. This is a logical progression as a great majority of the clergy is designated with the galero in different colors and sporting a variety of cords and tassels to indicate rank. The priest for example uses a black galero with a single cord ending in a single tassel on either side of the shield. So it would make sense for the deacon to adopt a black galero with no tassels or cords.
The problem for Catholic deacons however is that this a strictly Anglican custom granted to them by a specific warrant of the Earl Marshall. This practice has not been sanctioned by the Vatican for Catholic deacons. It is interesting to speculate on how the Anglican Ordinariate may affect Catholic heraldry but that remains to be seen. Matthew Alderman has a great article on this over at The Anglo Catholic. Matthew later posted a followup with Fr. Guy Selvester’s comments.
According to James Charles Noonan, Agostino Cardinal Casaroli, who served as the Vatican’s Secretary of State from 1979-1990, signed a document that stipulated for the deacon a ciborium and humeral veil surmounting the shield as well as a diagonal line across the top of the shield itself (in chief, a bendlet sinister) symbolizing the deacon’s stole. While this presents many interesting artistic possibilities there are a couple of problems here as well. First I have been unable to verify this independent of Mr. Noonan’s statement. Other Ecclesial heraldists (yes, there is such a thing) whom I have consulted likewise cannot validate this statement. Since I can easily find a document on this subject from 1969, you would think that instructions from the 1980’s that are meant for the entire Catholic diaconate, would be readily available.
The second problem, is that the Church does not concern itself with what is on the shield as much as it does with what you place around it. Stipulating a diagonal line (a bendlet in heraldic terms) be placed on the shield is not consistent with the practice of heraldry in the Church. This is not to say that a new armorial bearing can be whatever the bearer wants it to be. There are rules that govern the design of the shield that are intended to foster simplicity, beauty, and clarity and these should certainly be followed in consultation with someone who knows them when designing a new achievement. That being said, until the Vatican sanctions or recognizes a specific distinction for deacons, or unless Cardinal Casaroli’s document comes to light, I would not in good conscience recommend that a deacon adopt this practice.
So where does that leave us? We are pretty much where we started. Although deacons may use a helm with mantling, or a crest and torse, (as can anyone else, deacon or not) these are not desirable as they reflect a martial character that is incompatible with the clerical state. Remember that deacons are clergy. So for the moment the best solution for a deacon who would like to adopt a coat-of-arms is to use the shield with a motto if one is desired and leave it at that. A very conservative approach but very fitting for clergy that model Christ the Servant.
Why does it matter? It has been asked why citizens of a republic should concern themselves with a tradition so closely tied to monarchy and one that retains an air of elitism. I would answer firstly that it continues a long standing tradition within the Church but secondly, as Archbishop Heim points out in his book, Heraldry in the Church, its origin, customs and laws:
“the coat of arms has become a sign of that personal code which all men wish to defend. The arms represent, so to speak, a program of life for one who bears them. They invite him to be faithful to himself and to his principles.”
We all need to be reminded from time to time of what we are fighting for.
If you are interested in adopting a coat of arms or would like a new rendering of an existing design, please contact me.
Pax Vobiscum