At what point in Church history did priests begin to wear special vestments?

[andrewstx]

I’d like to ask when some Protestant ministers began to wear business suits. Although some of them don’t even do that anymore.

No. A lot of them now wear business casual, mostly khaki pants and polo shirts with not even ties.

 

[andrewstx]

Protestants saw Catholic vestments at the time of the Reformation as symbols of a priesthood understood as having magical properties that lent itself toward creating superstition and misguided devotional practices. They criticized this severely. In contrast, a Protestant pastor/ minister/ teaching elder/ etc. is a man authorized to preach, teach, and administer the (two real) sacraments — baptism and The Lord’s Supper (Eucharist). It was standard practice for Protestant clergy to wear robes when leading worship, however this was an era when all professors, other academics, and even students wore robes, and it was academic apparel Protestant clergy wore rather than the apparel of the priesthood.

Currently, in the United States Protestant clergy generally choose one of three options. (1) Academic apparel usually in the form of a plain black V-neck robe although often with doctoral chevrons if they have been earned. Within this understanding, stoles are sometimes worn with this type of robe or even stitched into it as a general emblem of ordination. (2) Protestant clergy at more liturgical congregations often wear an alb and stole. A chasuble is quite rare. This use is determined by the specific congregation, so while almost all Anglican and Lutheran clergy wear an alb and stole, there are some low-low churches that adopt a broadly casual attire that includes the clergy. (3) A number of Protestant churches with reformed, revivalist, fundamentalist, or charismatic origins had clergy that wore suits. When the majority of their male attendees wore suits to worship this third group of clergy also wore suits, but now that suits are increasingly passé the wearing of suits, especially with ties, by these types of Protestant clergy continues to decline.

In the 60s and early 70s liturgical Protestant ministers wore cassock, surplice, and stole. Some times they added a academic hood.

 

[Rfrmtn_Catholic]

In the 60s and early 70s liturgical Protestant ministers wore cassock, surplice, and stole. Some times they added a academic hood.

During the period of the Protestant Reformation in England wearing a white surplice over a black cassock was a point of significant controversy during part of this time. The more Puritan inclined members of the Church of England objected to clergy being singled out for a white covering and refused to wear a white surplice, but preferring instead to wear a plain black cassock.

The use of the academic hood, usually only worn when the wearer has a doctorate, went along with the doctoral chevrons (see my #1 above). From my perspective, that usage reflects a conflict between the idea of wearing a simple/plain/humble black robe and a simple/plain/humble black robe that also communicates “I HAVE A DOCTORATE.” I think this desire to be “Rev. Dr.” rather than “Rev. Mr.” is part of the motivation/attraction for a D.Min. (for some). Actually, for many, the title Dr. as it was used replaced Rev. such that Rev. John Smith became Dr. John Smith. It is relatively recently, among mainline Protestants, that this “promotion” usage has tended to be replaced by distinguishing between degrees earned and ordained status. I apologize for digressing about this.

 

[patrick457]

*]The chasuble was originally an outer garment. This is most evident when you see the old-style conical chasubles.

To be more exact, the chasuble was originally a sort of poncho-like cloak known as the paenula. The paenula was originally worn by slaves, soldiers and other people of low degree, but gradually became fashionable among the upper classes. By 382 the paenula became the proper everyday dress of senators. At first, the paenula (or planeta) wasn’t a garment specific to priests: most clergymen once wore it as an overgarment. (There was once the folded chasuble and the broad stole, worn by the deacon and subdeacon during penitential seasons, which is a holdover of this original practice.)

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Incidentally, the cope is actually just the chasuble with the front unstitched.

*]The mitre is based of the description of the Hebrew High Priest’s headcovering, found in the Old Testament.

The Christian mitre isn’t directly based on the OT headgear (although later typology liked to connect the two). Its origins might be traced from hats like the pilos or the petasos.

http://qph.is.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-028f8964836a29bc0d6baf2feff85f49
Pilos

http://rpmedia.ask.com/ts?u=/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7c/Petasos.jpg/120px-Petasos.jpg

*]The zuchetto was always a skullcap, to replace the Jewish kippah. The stem was added to make it easy to take off (whenever the name of Christ was mentioned).

Actually, the kippah (aka yarmulke) and the zuchetto are of different origins. The zuchetto was originally a cap designed to keep the heads of clerics warm (remember that clergymen were usually tonsured in those days and so the top of their heads are shaved off).

 

[Aramis]

Vestments started out as essentially a priest’s best set of every day clothes, which were Roman clothes. When clothing changed from the long, drapey clothing of the Roman empire into forms more recognizable–at least for men–today, that is when vestments began to “look different.” Vestments didn’t split from regular clothing. Regular clothing split from vestments.

Not quite true.

The cut was the same as normal garments of the 1st and 2nd century romans, but the colors were not. Liturgical garments were white with red, and red with white, even in the 2nd century.

Normal enough, except for the colors. Colors symbolic of Blood of the martyrs and of purity. (Note that the Syriac churches in union still use pretty much only use red, white, and gold for vestments.)

 

[Malleorum_Deus]

No. A lot of them now wear business casual, mostly khaki pants and polo shirts with not even ties.

Even business casual is being replaced…
With Douchebag Chic.

 

[JamesCaruso]

Not quite true.

The cut was the same as normal garments of the 1st and 2nd century romans, but the colors were not. Liturgical garments were white with red, and red with white, even in the 2nd century.

Normal enough, except for the colors. Colors symbolic of Blood of the martyrs and of purity. (Note that the Syriac churches in union still use pretty much only use red, white, and gold for vestments.)

The Catholic Encyclopedia remarks: “Benedict XIV (De Sacro Sacrificio Missæ I, VIII, n. 16) says that up to the fourth century white was the only liturgical colour in use.” newadvent.org/cathen/04134a.htm This seems to contradict what you are saying. but I don’t point this out to refute your statement, only to elicit more information. If your understanding runs deep in this area, maybe you can explain his apparent misperception. Peace. James

 

[Zekariya]

The Catholic Encyclopedia remarks: “Benedict XIV (De Sacro Sacrificio Missæ I, VIII, n. 16) says that up to the fourth century white was the only liturgical colour in use.” newadvent.org/cathen/04134a.htm This seems to contradict what you are saying. but I don’t point this out to refute your statement, only to elicit more information. If your understanding runs deep in this area, maybe you can explain his apparent misperception. Peace. James

White is still the only liturgical color in the Coptic Church.

 

[Aramis]

The Catholic Encyclopedia remarks: “Benedict XIV (De Sacro Sacrificio Missæ I, VIII, n. 16) says that up to the fourth century white was the only liturgical colour in use.” newadvent.org/cathen/04134a.htm This seems to contradict what you are saying. but I don’t point this out to refute your statement, only to elicit more information. If your understanding runs deep in this area, maybe you can explain his apparent misperception. Peace. James

Depictions from the era always show red accents on white vestments.

By the 4th century, reversed colors were being used for penitential seasons in some areas; some illustrations of the era show 3rd century with some clergy in red with white.

All other colors are later eras.

 

[patrick457]

Depictions from the era always show red accents on white vestments.

By the 4th century, reversed colors were being used for penitential seasons in some areas; some illustrations of the era show 3rd century with some clergy in red with white.

All other colors are later eras.

The clavi (narrow strips of colored fabric woven into tunics so that they descended from the shoulders, running vertically parallel) are a common feature of Roman-era clothing.

 

[JamesCaruso]

Depictions from the era always show red accents on white vestments.

By the 4th century, reversed colors were being used for penitential seasons in some areas; some illustrations of the era show 3rd century with some clergy in red with white.

All other colors are later eras.

Somewhere along the line we must have switched from red to purple for penitential seasons. It all seems so ordinary now by usage, but when you stop and think about it, purple is more a color of royalty than of penance. The only thing that comes to mind is the purple cloak used to humiliate Christ by depicting him as a mock king by the Roman soldiers, and even that was meant to denote royalty if only in a mocking way.

 

[andrewstx]

The clavi (narrow strips of colored fabric woven into tunics so that they descended from the shoulders, running vertically parallel) are a common feature of Roman-era clothing.

Isn’t that a dalmatic, still worn by deacons in the CC, and subdeacons in the OC?

 

[patrick457]

Isn’t that a dalmatic, still worn by deacons in the CC, and subdeacons in the OC?

I think you mean that the dalmatic has clavi in it. Many tunics in those days had them.

 

[Aramis]

Somewhere along the line we must have switched from red to purple for penitential seasons. It all seems so ordinary now by usage, but when you stop and think about it, purple is more a color of royalty than of penance. The only thing that comes to mind is the purple cloak used to humiliate Christ by depicting him as a mock king by the Roman soldiers, and even that was meant to denote royalty if only in a mocking way.

Rome did - Byzantium didn’t. Nor the Assyrians, Copts, nor Antiochenes.

Rome has the most diverse formal system of colors - Gold, White/Silver, Red, Purple, Rose, Green, and Black; some regional use of Blue, as well.

Byzantines still formally have only two “colors”: Light and Dark.

There are several informal systems for the Byzantines including Orange, Green, Blue, Black, Red, White, Gold, Purple… but formally, they’re “Dark” or “Light”, and all but orange, white and black can be in either light or dark. Large concelebrations can be a riot of color… Purple in the Byzantine tends to be (from what I’ve seen) for the commemorations of Christ’s suffering.

Our deacon has 3 dalmatics at present (that I know of): Gold with Red, White with Gold, and Red with Black…

A prior pastor had vestments in light blue, dark blue, light green, dark green, white with silver, gold with blue, and dark red with gold.

 

[John_Martin]

A non-Catholic friend is asking me about this, and I hoped someone here could give me an answer.
At what point in the history of the Church did priests begin to have special garments/ vestments set aside for use when celebrating the Mass?
Is it possible to identify the time when they began to use specific colors of vestments for seasons of the year, or for Masses for particular purposes, such as black vestments for funeral Masses?
Was there a specific period when bishops or Cardinals began to wear brightly colored vestments, particularly gold, scarlet or purple?

I expect that at best any answer to these questions is going to be very approximate, but even a very approximate answer may be helpful.

I have read and heard (Scott Hahn, et. al.) that the book of Revelation gives an image of the Mass in Heaven that is simultaneous with our Mass on earth, and that the robes / garments we see here are meant to remind us that we are celebrating the Eucharist together with Heaven, the Angels and Saints and the Lamb that is living but had been slain.

• And when I turned I saw seven golden lampstands, 13 and among the lampstands was someone like a son of man,d] dressed in a robe reaching down to his feet and with a golden sash around his chest.

That is why the book of revelation was not really mysterious to the earlier Christians, because they knew it was revealing the truth of the content of the Mass. They were participating heaven.

John Martin

 

[JamesCaruso]

Rome did - Byzantium didn’t. Nor the Assyrians, Copts, nor Antiochenes.

Rome has the most diverse formal system of colors - Gold, White/Silver, Red, Purple, Rose, Green, and Black; some regional use of Blue, as well.

Byzantines still formally have only two “colors”: Light and Dark.

There are several informal systems for the Byzantines including Orange, Green, Blue, Black, Red, White, Gold, Purple… but formally, they’re “Dark” or “Light”, and all but orange, white and black can be in either light or dark. Large concelebrations can be a riot of color… Purple in the Byzantine tends to be (from what I’ve seen) for the commemorations of Christ’s suffering.

Our deacon has 3 dalmatics at present (that I know of): Gold with Red, White with Gold, and Red with Black…

A prior pastor had vestments in light blue, dark blue, light green, dark green, white with silver, gold with blue, and dark red with gold.

Do you think that the purple for penitential seasons in the Roman Church came from Christ’s being dressed in a purple robe during his passion? What other connection could there be?

 

[Aramis]

Do you think that the purple for penitential seasons in the Roman Church came from Christ’s being dressed in a purple robe during his passion? What other connection could there be?

Don’t know- the reasoning is obscured in history.

However, dye instability is another potential reason.
And Purple dyes can cover a lot of issues. Dye a wine-stained white vestment purple, and it no longer shows.

Penitential seasons were the time for old but serviceable vestments… purple thus is potentially due to being old, stained, and rendered serviceable again by dyeing.

 

[JamesCaruso]

Don’t know- the reasoning is obscured in history.

However, dye instability is another potential reason.
And Purple dyes can cover a lot of issues. Dye a wine-stained white vestment purple, and it no longer shows.

Penitential seasons were the time for old but serviceable vestments… purple thus is potentially due to being old, stained, and rendered serviceable again by dyeing.

That’s a notion that never would have occurred to me. It makes sense if you think a deliberate attempt to use the oldest vestments would be considered to be in the spirit of doing penance. OTOH, Christ taught when you fast to wash your face and make yourself look as though you were not fasting. It’s all very confusing at times.