Storms of controversy have always swirled around the staff's design. Some critics of the staff are disturbed by how the corpus, the figure of Christ, is distorted and how the crossbar of the cross is bent. Some believe that the distortions are appropriately expressive of the intense weight of the burden of our sins that Christ bore on the Cross, while others believe that the distortions and what they call the "bent cross" are Satanic in origin and intent. My intention here is to describe the origins of this disputed papal staff, and show some of its artistic predecessors in hopes of setting the record straight. Like it or not, it is a valid sacred symbol.
Paul VI, Lello Scorzelli, and the Commission of the Pastoral Staff
As mentioned above, Pope Paul VI was the first to carry this staff, which was created for him by sculptor Lello Scorzelli. As I discovered when I started researching this post, Paul VI was an active patron of the arts like many popes before him. While he was still Archbishop Montini, Paul VI began a long association with Scorzelli[1]. Montini first hired Scorzelli in 1959 to make portraits of all the clergy who participated in Vatican II, and those portraits are now in the Vatican Museum.
After he was elected pope, Paul VI gave Scorzelli a studio in the Vatican in 1963, where the sculptor lived for 15 years. Scorzelli executed several big works during that time, including panels of the Stations of the Cross and the Last Supper for the Pope’s private chapel. The most presigious of Scorzelli's pieces by far were four bas-reliefs Scorzelli created for Porta della Preghiera, which is one of the five doors of St. Peter's Basilica. (Two other doors of St. Peter were also commissioned from other artists by Pope Paul VI.)[2].
However, the most well known of all of Scorzelli's creations for Paul VI is the papal staff.
The Staff with the Upward Curving Crossbar
Paul VI Pastoral Staff |
Staff with upward-curving crossbar |
The staff with the downward curving crossbar is the only one that continued in use by popes after Paul VI's reign.
The History of Papal Staffs
It is significant to realize that before Paul V previous popes did not use staffs, which are also called ferulas. According to an article title "The Staff" at the Vatican website, the staff has been the liturgical insignia of bishops and abbots since at least the seventh century, but not of popes. "The reason why the pope did not use the staff resides in the fact that the staff was a symbol of investiture of a newly elected bishop given to him by the metropolitan archbishop or by another bishop ... . The pope, however, did not receive investiture from another bishop. ... The pope receives his power from God alone."
Around the time of the High Middle Ages or earlier, the "traditional crozier came into use as an expression of papal authority. ... The use of the staff [crozier] was never a part of the papal liturgy, except on some occasions such as the opening of the Holy Door and the consecration of churches." With all that historical precedent I'm sure firmly in mind, Pope Paul VI invented a new type of staff, and he first used it at the closing of the Second Vatican Council. Paul VI's new staff was called a pastoral staff, and he used the papal pastoral staff in most liturgical celebrations.
After Pope Paul VI died, Pope John Paul I used the pastoral staff of Paul VI during his month-long reign, and Pope John Paul II took it up when he was elected to the office after his predecessor's death. And the staff with the downward curving cross bar is most identified with him.
Partway through his reign, Pope John Paul II started using a lighter modified copy of the staff. Pope Benedict also carried the staff with the downward curving cross for several years (although it is not clear whether the one he used was the original or the copy).
Pope Benedict XVI with the Staff of Paul VI |
Satanic Symbol? Come On, Do You Really Think So?
Some have expressed a hatred and misunderstanding about the so-called bent cross on the pastoral staff that Pope Francis has begun to carry. Some seem to despise it just as a modernist piece of bad art.
Others go so far as to claim that the bent cross is a deliberately chosen Satanic symbol. A 1983 book that makes this extravagent claim is quoted by some extreme Protestant sects who use it to support their claims hat the Church is the anti-Christ. Satanists, they claim, twist our holy symbols to pervert them, and the distorted corpus denotes the anti-Christ. They claim that the reason that last four popes after the second Vatican council carried this staff with the bent cross is that the Vatican has been infiltrated with satanists.
These fantastic ideas have even been picked up by some traditionalist Catholics of my acquaintance. I ask them how they can believe such things and still be Catholic, and I haven't heard a satisfactory answer yet.
The Actual Truth
The actual truth seems to be that the distorted figure of Christ on the controversial papal staff was based on a drawing made by the great Carmelite mystic monk, St. John of the Cross, from a vision that he had of Christ crucified.
One reason John Paul II liked this staff may be that he himself almost became a Carmelite contemplative, before he was told by his bishop that the Church needed him to stay in the world instead of be cloistered away in a monastery. The title of the doctoral dissertation written by Karol Wotyla, the future pope, was titled Faith in the Mystical Writings of Saint John of the Cross.
Papal Pastoral Staff or Crozier by Taylor Marshall is a good article that speculates on the source of the bent cross design. Marshall mentioned Salvador Dali's painting Christ of St. John of the Cross without showing it. The image below is from the surprisingly good Wikipedia article about Salvador Dali's painting. Notice that in Dali's depiction of the suffering body of Christ on the Cross, the corpus is bent but not the cross.
Marshall also posted the Grunewald crucifixion, without specifically attributing it as an inspiration for the bent cross. But really, all you have to do is look at it to grasp the connection between the Grunewald painting and the Scorzelli staff.
[1] Article on Scorzelli's life and work
[2] Italian article about Saint Peter's with a description of the basilica's five doors.
[3[ Details about the papal staffs used by Paul VI
[4] Article from the Vatican website from November 2013 titled "The Staff."
Pope Benedikt did use the Original made for Paul VI. See: http://www.roma-antiqua.de/forum/rom_88/lello_scorzelli_1921_1997_a-25167/index2.html
ReplyDeleteand
http://rosenkranzbeten.info/rosenkranzbeten/die-ferula-pauls-des-vi-lello-scorzelli/
Thank you for your great article. I'm deeply ashamed about the rumors/gossip about the staff as "satanic symbol". I can't believe, that Catholics can think in such a mean and ugly manner about their popes. It's absolutely disgusting!
No. The modernist anti-church is disgusting.
DeletePURE EVIL
ReplyDeletehttps://romancatholicbeliefs.org/the-roman-catholic-popes-evil-behavior/
Marshal a protestant (still) article is lies. The depiction of Hesus in the vision of St John has no bent cross or us Jesus legs left open. It is curious that all popes since VII only use it. VII pooes authority comes from man (modernism) not God and so a satanic crucifix was chosen created by a heretic satantic artist.
ReplyDeleteEven if the staff was not meant to be a satanic symbol, there are still a lot of things wrong within the Catholic religion. Their churches are adorned with all manner of lucifarian and pagan symbols and statues. They hold Mary on a higher standing than Christ. This is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to all of the creepy stuff that is part of the Catholic religion.
ReplyDeleteProtestantism is theologically idiotic and you seem pretty idiotic too.
DeleteYou didn't refute or explain anything. You just said its okay because it is and took the opportunity to have a pop at anyone who doubts the validity of the now thoroughly protestantised modernist "Catholic" Church.
ReplyDeleteWhy does this "sacred" symbol depict our lord with his legs open? Why do the modernist "popes" choose a crucifix designed by a man who wasn't even a Catholic?
Why do you members of a heretical modernist anti-church still cling to words like "Catholic" when your beliefs, words, and deeds are an affront to the almighty?
Most crucifixes depict Jesus after his death. He's typically shown with the wound in his side and his neck limp with his head down and to the side and his chin on his chest. This crucifix is said to depict Jesus in his agony. A crucified person died slowly and eventually by suffocation. The person was only capable of breathing by pulling themselves upward with their arms while pushing upward with their legs. Although I'd think that both the stipes (vertical post) and the patibulum (horizontal crossbar) would be of sufficient strength to hold their shape regardless of how much the person being crucified pulled downward on it, the "bent cross" (although it's actually a crucifix) is said to represent both the spiritual and psychological weight of our sins as well the the struggle and agony Christ endured until he could no longer pull himself upward to breathe. Once dead it is reasonable to expect that his knees would bend under the weight of his body and, because his feet were nailed one on top of the other at a single point, that his knees would also fall apart from one another with his thighs abducted. The word "catholic" means unified so, I'm not certain how best to respond to that part of your comment as I don't understand how it is that you feel that anyone whose words and deeds are an affront to the Almighty shouldn't use it. I've been a Catholic for over 20 years and nether I nor anyone in my church believes, says or does anything that could be considered an affront to God the father, Christ the son or the Holy Spirit despite that we all sin and require and rely on God's mercy. None of us are perfect...only forgiven ☺️💕🙏🏼
Delete