T
Trevelyan
Guest
Does a bishop have the authority to order a priest to desist from wearing a cassock or roman collar? Or do priests have a kind of ‘right’ to wear clerical garb?
- Status
E
edward_george
Guest
From what I understand, it is the perogative of the individual priest as to what sort of clerical wear he dons, but he is supposed to wear something recognizable as clerical wear. This, of course, is also contingent upon whether or not the priest is a member of a religious order.
-ACEGC
-ACEGC
C
CRW
Guest
What is clerical garb?
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
The Code of Canon Law says the following.
Can. 284 Clerics are to wear suitable ecclesiastical dress, in accordance with the norms established by the Episcopal Conference and legitimate local custom.
Can. 669 §1 As a sign of their consecration and as a witness to poverty, religious are to wear the habit of their institute, determined in accordance with the institute’s own law.
§2 Religious of a clerical institute who do not have a special habit are to wear clerical dress, in accordance with can. 284.
So, for a secular priest, it appears that it depends on what the Episcopal Conference has said, which in the USA is the USCCB.
For religious priests it is laid out by the order.
Can. 284 Clerics are to wear suitable ecclesiastical dress, in accordance with the norms established by the Episcopal Conference and legitimate local custom.
Can. 669 §1 As a sign of their consecration and as a witness to poverty, religious are to wear the habit of their institute, determined in accordance with the institute’s own law.
§2 Religious of a clerical institute who do not have a special habit are to wear clerical dress, in accordance with can. 284.
So, for a secular priest, it appears that it depends on what the Episcopal Conference has said, which in the USA is the USCCB.
For religious priests it is laid out by the order.
A
AlexV
Guest
Show me a bishop who bans a secular priest from a cassock, and I’ll show you a diocese with serious problems.
T
Trevelyan
Guest
Just for the record, this question was entirely hypothetical. I do not know any bishop who has done this.
Clerical garb means clerical clothing.
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
As the Canons point out I think this may be within the rights of the bishop to do.
They already do place restrictions on the clerical dress of some clerics, permanent deacons.
W
Walking_Home
Guest
I am relieved to know. Since the start of this thread----I have been troubled----as to why a bishop—would restrict the cassock and roman collar.
B
Brain
Guest
Yeah, I dont think any bishop has supressed the cassock. Frankly, I dont think it is the sort of thing that would be worth a episcopal command, so long as the priests can be recognized as such I am pretty sure the bishops will be quite content.
I think the lessening of use of the cassock might simply have more to do with prevailing style in the high fashion world of clerical dress
or peer pressure amoung the clergy.
I think the lessening of use of the cassock might simply have more to do with prevailing style in the high fashion world of clerical dress
or peer pressure amoung the clergy.
M
mercygate
Guest
An Orthodox graduate student and subdeacon at our local Catholic University-cum-Seminary told me yesterday that the head of campus ministry asked him not to wear his cassock when he walks across campus from the dorm to the chapel to lead his evening prayer because seminarians wanted the privilege of wearing the cassock also, and “management” was not pleased and not about to go along with it.
A
Andreas_Hofer
Guest
The particular law for the US clearly leaves the wearing of the cassock at the discretion of the cleric (as far as the OP goes, the hypothetical priest).
Also, the canons don’t restrict permanent deacons from wearing clerical garb, they dispense them from strict obligation (can. 288). Bishops who “won’t allow” their permanent deacons to wear the collar (let alone a cassock) are, as far as I can see, overstepping their authority. Going along with the bishop’s prohibition is fine, but I doubt he would survive a canonical challenge.
The USCCB particular law concerning clerical garb is for all clerics and doesn’t mention any prohibitions against deacons dressing as clerics (which they indisputably are). While they are obviously dispensed from obligation unless it is imposed on them by particular law, I think deacons are also clearly not forbidden by anything in these laws from dressing according to their state.
The National Conference of Catholic Bishops, in accord with the prescriptions of canon 284, hereby decrees that without prejudice to the provisions of canon 288, clerics are to dress in conformity with their sacred calling.
In liturgical rites, clerics shall wear the vesture prescribed in the proper liturgicad books. Outside liturgical functions, a black suit and Roman collar are the usual attire for priests. The use of the cassock is at the discretion of the cleric.
In the case of religious clerics, the determinations of their proper institutes or societies are to be observed with regard to wearing the religious habit.
usccb.org/plm/canon284.shtml
T
TimOliv
Guest
A similar thing happened to me. However, in my case it was the Diocese telling us that seminarians shouldn’t be wearing a Roman Collar with their cassocks.
…then they were reminded that the order dictates our uniform, not the Diocese.
B
Brain
Guest
Question, where deacons are permitted (whether the power to permit exists or not) to dress as clerics, are they allowed the cassock or is the cassock, as clerical dress in a public setting more of a “priest” thing?
S
Struggling
Guest
Absolutely ridiculous, especially since they are trying to ban an Orthodox from wearing it (which shows little respect for the Orthodox)…and especially since their own seminarians want to.
I think it is sort of a good sign, however: the younger priests are more traditional and it is the crusty old 70’s management that is desperately trying to cling to liberalism.
Well…I really don’t think they should be. Until first tonsure in the tridentine rite, or diaconal ordination in the new rite, the person is not a cleric. As a seminarian they may wear the cassock…but should not wear the collar with it, nor wear the surplice at liturgical functions.
T
Trevelyan
Guest
A deacon is a cleric, and the National Conference of Catholic Bishops quoted above says: “The use of the cassock is at the discretion of the cleric.”
(But, then again, ‘cleric’ in that sentence might just be referring to ‘priest’ in the preceding sentence.)
C
ComradeAndrei
Guest
At my seminary, there are some of us who would like to be able to wear cassocks instead of regular clothes but it doesn’t really go anywhere. Not yet anyway.
Our Archdiocese expects us to wear cassock, collar, and surplice at liturgical functions within the Archdiocese whenever we perform a liturgical role or when we are all assembled together as seminarians (which translates into at least 3 or 4 times a year, more when we work at a parish).
S
Struggling
Guest
If you buy your own cassock, you sure EDIT should be able to wear it!
What are these seminary directors thinking?
Well, I am a purist in this regard.
I don’t believe that the laity should wear clerical clothing. I think seminarians can and should wear the cassock…but without collar until they become clerics.
I am into the old rite, but I don’t even believe traditional altar boys should wear the cassock and surplice. Especially not with the collar. I know lot’s of people have fond memories of that, or like it aesthetically, but they aren’t clerics! Of course, I’d always prefer a true and ordained Acolyte to take that role in a tridentine mass…but if a lay man or boy must take it extraordinarily…I’d prefer that he just wore a suit. Or even an alb (a garment proper to ministers, not necessarily clerical). But not the cassock (unless he’s a seminarian) and certainly not a collar or surplice (until he becomes a cleric)
D
Dr.Bombay
Guest
In our diocese, the seminarians are not allowed to wear a cassock on campus. But they don’t attend a seminary since our diocese doesn’t have a seminary.
But, you’ll be pleased to know, at least 3 of the seminarians wear cassocks when they attend our TLM.
I know. 3 Novus Ordo seminarians attending the TLM. Oh, the horror.
But, you’ll be pleased to know, at least 3 of the seminarians wear cassocks when they attend our TLM.
I know. 3 Novus Ordo seminarians attending the TLM. Oh, the horror.
J
justme
Guest
They don’t attend a seminary? Then they are not seminarians.In our diocese, the seminarians are not allowed to wear a cassock on campus. But they don’t attend a seminary since our diocese doesn’t have a seminary.
But, you’ll be pleased to know, at least 3 of the seminarians wear cassocks when they attend our TLM.
I know. 3 Novus Ordo seminarians attending the TLM. Oh, the horror.
My bet is that they attend a seminary outside of your diocese as many dioceses do not have their own seminaries but use others.
Also, no such thing as a Novus Ordo seminarian or a Novus Ordo priest.
M
mercygate
Guest
When I was a seminarian (in the year Noah built the ark) – OK: I was an Episcopalian – we were expected to wear the collar all the time. We put a thin slice of electrical tape down the middle, top to bottom, to distinguish ourselves as not-quite-there yet. Generally we did not wear the cassock, even in the close, although we certainly wore it for all liturgical and academic ceremonies.If you buy your own cassock, you sure EDIT should be able to wear it!
What are these seminary directors thinking?
Well, I am a purist in this regard.
I don’t believe that the laity should wear clerical clothing. I think seminarians can and should wear the cassock…but without collar until they become clerics.
I am into the old rite, but I don’t even believe traditional altar boys should wear the cassock and surplice. Especially not with the collar. I know lot’s of people have fond memories of that, or like it aesthetically, but they aren’t clerics! Of course, I’d always prefer a true and ordained Acolyte to take that role in a tridentine mass…but if a lay man or boy must take it extraordinarily…I’d prefer that he just wore a suit. Or even an alb (a garment proper to ministers, not necessarily clerical). But not the cassock (unless he’s a seminarian) and certainly not a collar or surplice (until he becomes a cleric)
- Status