Archbishop Fisher of Sydney

User avatar
Chris Green
Posts: 2700
Joined: 10 Jul 2012, 13:06
Location: Karlstad, Sweden

Re: Archbishop Fisher of Sydney

Postby Chris Green » 19 Jul 2016, 21:08

If I may steal a quote from Fr Selvester's excellent blog https://exarandorum.wordpress.com/

The advent of the internet has increased the possibility for communication between such enthusiasts throughout the world but has also made for a rash of self-appointed heraldic "experts" who don't wish to engage in any scholarly pursuit of the heraldic arts and sciences and, either accidentally or purposefully seek to limit the possibilities for heraldic display accusing anyone who deviates from their own preconceived notions as guilty of self aggrandizement.


I don't think Fr Selvester is pointing the finger at anyone in the IAAH, though I may be wrong. For myself, my "preconceived notions" of heraldry are that modern practitioners should endeavour to maintain and enhance the art and science that we have inherited, avoiding breaks with tradition unless they are unavoidable. Thus in the case of Archbishop Fisher the assumption of four different coats of arms in the space of 11 years drove a coach and horses through heraldic tradition. The archbishop was and is fully entitled to impale his arms with those of his various appointments, but those who advised him that he might discard and/or change his personal arms as a whim were doing neither him nor heraldry a service.
Chris Green
IAAH President

Apohypaton

User avatar
GSelvester
Posts: 83
Joined: 10 Jul 2012, 23:01
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Archbishop Fisher of Sydney

Postby GSelvester » 20 Jul 2016, 18:50

I will repeat that Archbishop Fisher chose to ask a friend who is not well-versed in heraldry to design all three of his armorial achievements. As for the four coats of arms that Archbishop Coleridge has used while he did turn to those who do know heraldry well for help and advice he still wanted to do what he wanted regardless of that good advice. Absent an authority of some kind the way things work in the Church are that the bishop in question is the authority and there is no way to force his hand if he is unwilling to listen to the reasonable explanation offered especially with regard to an appeal to tradition. After all, we are now in the pontificate of the second pope who has chosen to innovate heraldically. Other bishops often take their cues from such actions.

User avatar
GSelvester
Posts: 83
Joined: 10 Jul 2012, 23:01
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Archbishop Fisher of Sydney

Postby GSelvester » 27 Jul 2016, 19:33

I should have added to that last response that, in the case of Abp. Coleridge, he may also have been under the impression that it was OK to modify his personal arms because of an error committed by someone who definitely knew heraldry well. I know its unfair and wrong to say something critical of someone who has passed on as he is not here to defend himself but Michael McCarthy, who I knew well and admired greatly, started the archbishop down this path. When Michael was contacted to do a new rendering of the arms at the time the archbishop was promoted from Auxiliary of Melbourne to Archbishop of Canberra he decided that the personal arms weren't very nice. He decided to offer to do a redesign of those arms to make them more like what he thought they should look like. Perhaps that's the moment when Abp. Coleridge got the mistaken impression that such action was OK? That actually would have been the moment to leave the personal arms as they were and endeavor to improve their appearance by a good marshaling and rendering by an artist as competent as Michael certainly was. Even a bad design can be improved in the hands of a good artist.

Marcus Karlsson
Posts: 950
Joined: 13 Jul 2012, 08:52
Location: Sweden

Re: Archbishop Fisher of Sydney

Postby Marcus Karlsson » 03 Sep 2016, 16:54

GSelvester wrote:
Marcus Karlsson wrote:Archbishop Mark Coleridge of Brisbane come to mind. If my mind serves me right McCarthy designed Arms for him while Auxiliary in Melbourne. Which he later changed.


Actually, when Coleridge was named Auxiliary of Melbourne he assumed arms designed by someone else. I don't know who. These are his original arms.

Image

When he was promoted to Archbishop of Canberra Michael McCarthy redesigned his personal arms and impaled them with Canberra.

Image

Abp. Coleridge intensely disliked this redesign but stayed quiet out of respect for Michael's reputation. After Michael's death he approached the President of the Australian Heraldry Society, Mr. Richard d'Apice about once again redesigning his personal arms while still in Canberra. The reworking of the design was undertaken by d'Apice and myself and emblazoned by Mr. Sandy Turnbull also of the AuHS.

Image

When the archbishop was translated to Brisbane he retained the third version of his personal arms and impaled them with the arms of Brisbane.

Image


Thanks for that clarification!


Return to “Ecclesiastical Heraldry”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest