Matthew Crawley became heir to Downton Abbey and the its title quite suddenly and unexpectedly when the former heir died on the Titanic.
Crawley, a country lawyer by trade, had never known the kind of life lived at Downton Abbey. On the outside it seemed like a life of pointless privilege and unnecessary trappings.
When he first arrived, Matthew refused to let anybody help him do in anything. He had no use for the maids, the footmen, but he especially eschewed his valet. When his valet tried to dress him, Matthew wouldn’t allow it. When the valet tried to offer assistance in picking out a pair of cuff-links, Matthew dismissed the notion and his valet as silly. The valet felt useless and the pain of such dismissal was obvious on his face.
Matthew was simpler and he was proud of that simplicity. He had never needed anyone to help him dress before and he didn’t see why he would need one now. And the clothing, ugh, the clothing. Matthew much preferred his plain ol’ suit to tuxedos and tails. His initial instinct was that all these accoutrements and formality was mere flash and frippery and he would quickly dispense with it all.
Yet, Lord Grantham counseled him that while all this grand tradition might seem purposeless, it was not. He explained to Matthew that these traditions meant something, not only to the people blandished upon, but to the people who provided the service and to others as well. Lord Grantham explained to Matthew that when he dismissed it all as useless, he was dismissing the value of lives and livelihoods spent learning the craft and the legitimate pride taken in hard work and diligence. He suggested that the service of the servants served not only their masters.
Over time, Matthew began to realize that their was some truth in Lord Grantham’s words and being a kind and considerate man, he pondered it. Perhaps his insistence on simplicity was just another form of pride? Perhaps in accepting his new role, the truly humble thing to do was forgo his preference for simplicity, self-reliance, and plainness? In accepting his new role, he had a responsibility to others for whom these things meant a great deal.
And so, in an act of humility and kindness, Matthew asked his valet to help him dress and said, “Would you be so kind as to pick me out a pair of cuff-links.” The valet smiled from ear to ear. Good Matthew had never been so humble and so self-effacing as when he accepted the assistance and adornments expected of his new role.
Matthew learned that simplicity is not always humility and pomp not always pride.
As the coming weeks and months unfold, we would all do well keep this lesson in mind.
March 18, 2013 at 5:04 pm
The sacred liturgy of Christ's Church on earth is not about us but about God and His Truth revealed through His Tradition, Scripture and Magisterium. No one has the authority to experiment or introduce novelties – that is egotistical and an affront to God. The Mass IS the Faith.
March 18, 2013 at 5:33 pm
I know what you're saying, and I don't disagree, but this just feels, to me, like a back handed slam on Francis because he's doing all these things.
Reading this and Father Z, it's feels like sour grapes for some reason.
March 18, 2013 at 6:07 pm
I tend to agree with Barbara C. that this is more of an introvert/extravert thing. I believe that Benedict is a deeply humble person and his act of submitting to all the trappings was his expression of humility. Yet I believe the rejection of these things is also Papa Francis' expression of humility. I also would like to remind folks of the part where Tom joins the servants for a meal. It was very much clucked about, but it was fitting in the circumstances for him not to hang on to traditions however well respected and established. I also remember hearing about Pope Pius X, that he was the first to dine with others rather than dining alone. It was rather "scandalous" at the time and those around him insisted that he must dine alone as it had been this way for hundreds of years, but he waved them off and said "I am the Pope now". Francis here is reminding me of Pius X. If he does not have need or desire of certain trappings, he is the Pope and he can jolly well do as he likes. 🙂 One further thought–at the time of Downton Abbey, it was important for the "common folk" to see a continuance of certain traditions. They understood the idea of nobility or royality and wished to see a certain elevation of the noble class. I wonder if some of the Papal trappings were more necessary or helpful when there was more of a sense of royalty/nobility and deeply respected and felt the fittingness of those traditions. It seems now that some of those things *can* be a stumbling block and Papa Francis' expression of simplicity is a way of reaching people in a way appropriate to our time. I've thought about this a lot in the last few days as I am seeing a lot of admiration and a lot of criticism and I understand both points of view but personally remain moved by these gestures of our new Pope.
Rebecca in ID
March 18, 2013 at 6:10 pm
"Reading this and Father Z, it's feels like sour grapes for some reason."
I agree. They might have their good intentions in pointing certain things out that matter to them, "not wearing the mozzetta, not wearing the red shoes, not wearing…" What would be said if he had taken to wearing sandals and the black habit of his order?
When I saw the 300,000 pilgrims in that square yesterday and saw them joyful and cheering, well, I see that as a blessing and not as anything negative. I wonder how many of then were wondering if he was dressed as a pope should be dressed?
My hope lies in the fact that something is stirring, something is bearing fruit with Papa Francisco. It is reported that many have gone back to confession in Argentina, after being away for so long. Not sure if that is true but the thought of such makes me hopeful.
I have seen his adoration, his faith, his love, of our Eucharistic Lord when he elevates the sacred host and precious blood and all "while not wearing the red shoes."
Yes, I know that the regalia that comes with his office is important but his faith is beautiful too and perhaps, in time, he will bend and follow and dress as a Pope and not because many are upset about it that he has not yet done so, but that he will do so out of love for Christ and nothing else.
Sorry, but many who are upset with what he wears or does not wear will need to bend as well. Do not become distracted….but pray! Pray! Pray!
March 18, 2013 at 6:12 pm
Micha Elyi –
I thought similar things about the "sell it and give the money to the poor" aspect. 🙂
FWIW, focusing just on the Pope– not on what folks are trying to project on to him– the choices he's making right now are in the "statement" stage. To paraphrase the apocryphal quote, preach always, use words when you gotta.
He didn't refuse to have the garments tailored, he just chose simpler ones; he hasn't insisted on unornamented cotton, but he has gone with plain white-on-white decoration when possible; he hasn't refused to be chauffeured at all, but he has chosen to take simpler forms of transportation when possible.
It's sort of like the last two Popes' different responses to physical limitations, both of which are living examples of different goals. JPII, suffering from a disease whose victims are commonly dehumanized to the point of death, refused to resign. B16, suffering from a much less dramatic side-effects of aging, gave up all the power of the office.
March 18, 2013 at 6:28 pm
Our new Holy Father will hopefully come to see that it is to honor the office he now holds as the Vicar of Christ on earth that warrents the beauty of extraordinary liturgy and accoutrements. It is not about him but about the office. St. Francis may have dressed in rags but he only wanted the best for the churches and the liturgy…and all sacred things such as vessels and vestments.
March 18, 2013 at 6:41 pm
Anyone who thinks that Father Z's writing on the Holy Father smacks of "sour grapes" just proves that they haven't ACTUALLY READ what Fr. Z has been writing about Pope Francis since his election.
March 18, 2013 at 6:57 pm
Great post. I did stop to think about the driver who was waiting to take our new pope, and the cobbler who crafted the red shoes. There are many talented people who live to serve. Sometimes it's humbling for us to accept their services. Hopefully we are reading too much into our new pope's actions. Time will tell!
March 18, 2013 at 7:29 pm
@ Jay Anderson…I read Fr. Z's article and wondered…regardless, the Holy Father is a man of faith and loves Christ and His Church and her people. I will not waste my time complaining or being upset he does not wear the red shoes nor the mozzetta. Instead, I will ask for forgiveness and pray and hope that all will be one.
March 18, 2013 at 8:03 pm
But he has written MANY posts in favor of the Holy Father (including a quite moving reflection on the night of his election regarding an encounter he had with Cardinal Bergoglio a few years back). An he had admonished those who have been critical (including in the comments to the very post in question). This one post – in which he respectfully explains what the red shoes mean – should not be taken as indicative of sour grapes on his part.
March 19, 2013 at 3:09 am
But red shoes symbolize the blood of the martyr…not royalty!!!
Whether he wears them or not isn't the most important thing. But I think that the Matthew Crawley metaphor is that wearing them, as Benedict did, was profound act of humility, submission, and self-denial and certainly NOT an act of pride or arrogance. He tried to teach what the symbols truly meant, which was a direct connection with the sacrifice of Peter.
Lori, you expressed a concern that if he had worn the traditional clothing, some might "simply have dismissed him and everything he stood for out of hand". This might be true, but they would be wrong in their interpretation. He still wore the cassock and people make fun of it all the time.
I am a lover of symbolism…but we need to know what the symbols represent! I would really like to hear what Pope Francis had in mind with these gestures.
March 19, 2013 at 3:30 am
Anonymous, thank you for pointing this out about the red shoes. You're right, I was actually more thinking about the carrying of the chair, etc., in relation to the trappings of royalty. And I agree with you that Benedict's submission to these traditions was profoundly humble especially as he *was* an introvert and I'm sure had a tendency to feel embarrassment. I agree there. I'm just thinking that Pope Francis is just doing something different and it's also totally okay–he is not *negating* the blood of the martyrs, for example, by choosing the simple black shoes his friends so thoughtfully gave him. Another example, besides Pius X, of a Pope who broke with accepted tradition, is Pius V. He was the first, from what I have been told, to wear the white cassock. It was simply that he was a Dominican, and he wished to wear the habit of his order rather than the traditional Papal garments. I am sure there were venerable reasons behind the traditional Papal garments and he was not insulting those or acting proudly, but he just really preferred to dress as a simple Dominican. And he was the Pope, and that was okay. This Pope is not doing anything nearly as extreme, from what I've seen so far!
Rebecca
March 19, 2013 at 2:40 pm
There's also a fine scene early in the movie "Gettysburg". Colonel Joshua Chamberlain is leading his men toward Gettysburg, and is walking his horse because it's blazing hot and if his men have to march, he will too. His master sergeant is a crusty emigre from Ireland who can't stand the South because their society is too aristocratic, like England (which he also doesn't care for much). But after a while he comes up to the colonel and suggests, you've made your point, now get on that horse – the men want to know that their officers aren't stupid.
March 19, 2013 at 2:42 pm
There's also a fine scene early in the movie "Gettysburg". Colonel Joshua Chamberlain is leading his men toward Gettysburg, and is walking his horse because it's blazing hot and if his men have to march, he will too. His master sergeant is a crusty emigre from Ireland who can't stand the South because their society is too aristocratic, like England (which he also doesn't care for much). But after a while he comes up to the colonel and suggests, you've made your point, now get on that horse – the men want to know that their officers aren't stupid.
March 19, 2013 at 2:42 pm
There's also a fine scene early in the movie "Gettysburg". Colonel Joshua Chamberlain is leading his men toward Gettysburg, and is walking his horse because it's blazing hot and if his men have to march, he will too. His master sergeant is a crusty emigre from Ireland who can't stand the South because their society is too aristocratic, like England (which he also doesn't care for much). But after a while he comes up to the colonel and suggests, you've made your point, now get on that horse – the men want to know that their officers aren't stupid.
March 19, 2013 at 2:42 pm
There's also a fine scene early in the movie "Gettysburg". Colonel Joshua Chamberlain is leading his men toward Gettysburg, and is walking his horse because it's blazing hot and if his men have to march, he will too. His master sergeant is a crusty emigre from Ireland who can't stand the South because their society is too aristocratic, like England (which he also doesn't care for much). But after a while he comes up to the colonel and suggests, you've made your point, now get on that horse – the men want to know that their officers aren't stupid.
March 19, 2013 at 4:48 pm
Another example, besides Pius X, of a Pope who broke with accepted tradition, is Pius V. He was the first, from what I have been told, to wear the white cassock. It was simply that he was a Dominican, and he wished to wear the habit of his order rather than the traditional Papal garments.
No, no, and NO!
St. Pius V was NOT the first pope to wear white. Popes have worn white since at least the time of Sixtus IV (d. 1484).
See this contemporary painting of Sixtus IV, and note his white cassock under his rochet:
http://www.christusrex.org/www1/vaticano/P-Platina.jpg
I'm a Lay Dominican and would love for the story of Pius V to be true, but it simply isn't.
March 19, 2013 at 6:03 pm
Caermonarius,
Ha, thanks! That's what I get for believing my husband (the lay Dominican). Next time I'll check sources. It's true about Pius X and his dinner, though. 🙂
Rebecca
March 19, 2013 at 6:08 pm
Hmm, so apparently this guy thinks that the story about Pius V is kinda true…http://electingthepope.net/question/why-does-the-pope-wear-white/
Maybe they wore white *a little bit* before, but after Pius V they wore white big-time? Seems like it's recent enough history that we should be able to get a straight story on it? I think it is true at any rate that Pius V chose to simply wear his Dominican habit?
Rebecca