Deacon Vestments In N.O.

[belgianwaffles9]

I did a search and couldn’t find anything, so sorry if this repeats.​

I was wondering what the GIRM says about the vestments to be worn by a deacon in the Novus Ordo (Ordinary form). In my home diocese of Arlington, known for being rather conservative, its not unusual to see deacons in dalmatics. In the diocese of Stockton, where i go to college, I’ve never seen a dalmatic at all. I have seen deacons with the usual alb-and-stole combination, and have even seen a mass where the reseident deacon wore a chasuble and the others wore just albs and stoles, while even visiting priests concelebrating were not wearing chasubles.

So; what is the requirement, per the GIRM, for the vestments of deacons? Are they still technically required to wear a dalmatic, or are they allowed to wear just the alb and stole when they are serving at mass?

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

From the GIRM:

**336. The sacred garment common to ordained and instituted ministers of any rank is the alb, to be tied at the waist with a cincture unless it is made so as to fit even without such. Before the alb is put on, should this not completely cover the ordinary clothing at the neck, an amice should be put on. The alb may not be replaced by a surplice, not even over a cassock, on occasions when a chasuble or dalmatic is to be worn or when, according to the norms, only a stole is worn without a chasuble or dalmatic.

1. The vestment proper to the deacon is the dalmatic, worn over the alb and stole. The dalmatic may, however, be omitted out of necessity or on account of a lesser degree of solemnity.
2. The stole is worn by the priest around his neck and hanging down in front. It is worn by the deacon over his left shoulder and drawn diagonally across the chest to the right side, where it is fastened.**

 

[belgianwaffles9]

From the GIRM:

**
338. The vestment proper to the deacon is the dalmatic, worn over the alb and stole. The dalmatic may, however, be omitted out of necessity or on account of a lesser degree of solemnity.

**

Thank you.

This is a great example of why i dont really like the GIRM… Why would anyone ever want to make mass less solemn. The only “necessity” i can really see as acceptible is not having one due to last minute planning or the lack of money in the budget. I dont think most of the deacons who dont wear a dalmatic really fit into that.

 

[jmdsc]

Thank you.

This is a great example of why i dont really like the GIRM… Why would anyone ever want to make mass less solemn. The only “necessity” i can really see as acceptible is not having one due to last minute planning or the lack of money in the budget. I dont think most of the deacons who dont wear a dalmatic really fit into that.

I must agree with you in the sense that most Deacons I know that don’t wear dalmatics, have very few other excuses beyond sheer laziness.

I own a vestment company and make many of our parishes chasubles (for no cost, of course) and every time I try to make matching dalmatics (again at no cost) I am rebuffed for a miriad of lame excuses.

My favorite excuse is “People mistake us for Priests and call us ‘Father’”. All I ever want to say is, “You’re right, rather than teaching the people, let’s treat them like mushrooms, keep them in the dark, and feed them manure!”

I feel that unless the parish simply cannot afford the dalmatics (there are many smaller companies that provide them at an extremely reasonable cost), that there is no excuse to not wear them!

 

[Deacon_Ed]

Given the price of dalmatics, you might be surprised! There are inexpensive ones, however, and they are less expensive than Byzantine vestments. Just for the record, I almost always wear a dalmatic when serving at a Sunday Mass, but since theyre “less solemn” tend to omit them for weekday Masses.

Deacon Ed

 

[Digitonomy]

Why would anyone ever want to make mass less solemn.

If mass were celebrated in a school gymnasium, they might dispense with some of the formalities for practical reasons, and indeed any mass which takes place outside of a normal church setting would probably be evaluated as to what changes from the norm may be required or advisable. Even at a church, I can imagine a daily mass for a retreat group being a bit less solemn, the extra time necessary for more formal preparation being used instead for confessions, prayer, catechesis, fellowship, etc.

 

[Andy_Corder]

I must agree with you in the sense that most Deacons I know that don’t wear dalmatics, have very few other excuses beyond sheer laziness.

I find your comment on why you think Deacons do not wear dalmatics interesting. From the Deacons I have talked to, there are numerous reasons, one of which is very much the price. I know here in the southwest, especially during the summer, heat has a major factor in it as well. As far as the issue of being confused with the Priest, that is a very real issue to most Deacons, and one not taken lightly. A candidate for deacon goes through different screenings in the process. One of the things a selection board looks out for is those candidates who cannot be a Priest for whatever reason (marriage, etc) but wants a liturgical presence. The last thing a diocese wants / needs is someone running around thinking and presenting themselves as a “mini-priest.” The issue you make lite of is a very real issue. Does it need education? Absolutely. But throwing all Deacons into the same bucket labeled “lazy” is not working towards that goal and is degrading to all Deacons out there. I know many Deacons and everyone of them works harder FOR FREE than most people I know in paid jobs.

 

[japhy]

…most Deacons I know that don’t wear dalmatics, have very few other excuses beyond sheer laziness.

I find your comment on why you think Deacons do not wear dalmatics interesting. From the Deacons I have talked to, there are numerous reasons, one of which is very much the price. … heat has a major factor in it as well. … being confused with the Priest … But throwing all Deacons into the same bucket labeled “lazy” is not working towards that goal and is degrading to all Deacons out there.

You didn’t read jmdsc’s comment closely enough. He did not say that most deacons have few other excuses, he said that most deacons that he knows have few other excuses.

As for being confused for a priest, why not correct the person when they make the mistake of calling a deacon a priest? Or are we afraid of correcting people nowadays too?

 

[Spiller]

Thank you.

This is a great example of why i dont really like the GIRM… Why would anyone ever want to make mass less solemn. The only “necessity” i can really see as acceptible is not having one due to last minute planning or the lack of money in the budget. I dont think most of the deacons who dont wear a dalmatic really fit into that.

• 115 degree days with no AC.
• Not enough dalmatics to go around.

I’ll say add something else. Our deeply challenged deacon used to wear dalmatics that looked indistinguishable from chasubles except when his hands were in the “orans position” (picture an NFL ref signaling a touchdown) or if he was elevating the chalice really high.

He would really play it up. He refuses to carry the Evangeliary in procession and instead walks with his hands clasped looking every bit like a priest.

He doesn’t wear dalmatics anymore and I seriously doubt it was his choice…

I don’t think he would be caught dead in the older style dalmatic which was instantaneously distinguishable from a chasuble.

NB: Your questions suggest you are focused more on the uniform than the ministry. Focus on what’s important – the garb will follow…

 

[EasterJoy]

This is a great example of why i dont really like the GIRM… Why would anyone ever want to make mass less solemn.

Every Sunday is a little Easter, but every day can’t be Easter Sunday. There have always been days on the liturgical calendar that have greater or lesser solmenity. You can’t make any Mass more solemn unless some Mass or another is, in some way, less solemn. It seems reasonable to do this by way of accidentals, like the decoration of the church and how elaborate the vestments are.

(PS: This is a great example of why you don’t like the GIRM? Really? )

 

[belgianwaffles9]

As for being confused for a priest, why not correct the person when they make the mistake of calling a deacon a priest? Or are we afraid of correcting people nowadays too?

Yes, yes we are. We live in a terrified, politically correct society where being corrected is the worst insult you can receive, and correcting someone the worst task.

I once saw what i presumed to be a priest wearing a cassock in my parish, and complimented him, saying ‘Father, this is the first time I’ve seen a parish priest in a cassock and I’m really glad you chose to wear it.’ He corrected me, saying he was actually a seminarian. I apologized for the mistake, and we had a delightful conversation. He is a very interesting man and will wake a wonderful priest some day. The point, however, is that it is so exceedingly simple for any deacon in a dalmatic to simply say “No, I am a Deacon.” If a deacon is chosing not to wear a dalmatic out of fear of being mistaken for a priest, it seems like he’s almost afraid of having to explain his role to the people he is supposed to be preaching to gospel to.

Every Sunday is a little Easter, but every day can’t be Easter Sunday. There have always been days on the liturgical calendar that have greater or lesser solmenity. You can’t make any Mass more solemn unless some Mass or another is, in some way, less solemn. It seems reasonable to do this by way of accidentals, like the decoration of the church and how elaborate the vestments are.

I understand. Not every mass can have a full choir and an organ, with a long train of priests and altar servers. But what i meant in the context of this discussion about dalmatics, is that i can not imagine a case where one would WANT to lessen the solemnity of the mass by purposefully not wearing a dalmatic. That is just my personal taste. If some deacons and their congregations would feel uncomfortable with a dalmatic being worn during mass in a gym of whatnot, then that is their pastoral decision, and as it is perfectly legal according to the GIRM, I wont complain.

Additionally, i can understand why heat might be an issue. I live in a pretty hot area of california for half the year, and i can understand why heat would be a problem. But i think there are vestments (of all types) made of light enough materials to minimize that issue. But again, if the parish simply cant afford that extra expense, It is through no fault of their own and as long as they’re doing everything in their power to create a reverent atmosphere with the resources they have, I commend them.

(PS: This is a great example of why you don’t like the GIRM? Really? )

Yes, it is; it is vague and open to widely divergent interpretations, which has the potential to lead to discord and controversy. Thus, it is a great example of some of the weaknesses of the current edition of the GIRM, in my opinion.

Spiller:

I’ll say add something else. Our deeply challenged deacon used to wear dalmatics that looked indistinguishable from chasubles except when his hands were in the “orans position” (picture an NFL ref signaling a touchdown) or if he was elevating the chalice really high.

Maybe thats what the deacon i assumed was in a chasuble was wearing. If i were his pastor i would probably also ask him to stop wearing that type of vestment.

Spiller:

NB: Your questions suggest you are focused more on the uniform than the ministry. Focus on what’s important – the garb will follow…

I agree that focusing on a reverent, worshipful atmosphere will eventually manifest itself in the proper vestments. But it works the other way, too: using reverent vestments which lift the mass to greater solemnity can also foster an atmosphere of greater awe and wonder at a mass. It works both ways, and both ways must be used. I would never advocate focusing on one at the expense of the other. Some places just need some extra help with the one aspect and may be doing pretty well with the other.

 

[MusicMan]

A couple of things here…

Lesser degree of solemnity probably refers to the rank of the celebration in question, not actually making the Mass less solemn. That would be a good reason for Fr. Deacon Ed omitting the dalmatic for daily Mass. The rank of the daily Mass is not typically a Solemnity.

Also, it’s not our place to question the design of the dalmatic. If a deacon wears a dalmatic that looks too much, in a lay person’s opinion, like a chasuble, that’s not a reason for the deacon to cease wearing it. There may be a myriad of reasons, all innocent, as to why the deacon wears that particular dalmatic, and none of them may have anything to do with a desire to be a “mini-priest.” Of course, if that’s the reason he’s wearing it, the matter is still between him and his pastor, and none of our business.

Also, the rubrics, while a bit vague, do not mandate the use of a dalmatic. There could be a myriad of innocent reasons why a deacon is not wearing one at Mass.

Better we concern ourselves with our own preparation for receiving the Lord than on fretting over the vestments of the deacon.

 

[Andy_Corder]

You didn’t read jmdsc’s comment closely enough. He did not say that most deacons have few other excuses, he said that most deacons that he knows have few other excuses.

As for being confused for a priest, why not correct the person when they make the mistake of calling a deacon a priest? Or are we afraid of correcting people nowadays too?

I did not say don’t correct the person. I don’t think it is wrong to correct people on liturigical things, but at the same time, I would rather see Deacons focusing on what they are ordained to do … preach the gospel, serve the people, minister to the needy… than run around after mass explaining over and over that they are not a priest.

Much like the previous comment, I think the focus should not be on the uniform as much as the service.

 

[japhy]

Lesser degree of solemnity probably refers to the rank of the celebration in question, not actually making the Mass less solemn. That would be a good reason for Fr. Deacon Ed omitting the dalmatic for daily Mass. The rank of the daily Mass is not typically a Solemnity.

I agree; a deacon should not wish to make Mass less solemn by not wearing a dalmatic, a deacon should make the decision (not) to wear a dalmatic based on the solemnity of the Mass being celebrated. On a ferial day, I wouldn’t expect to see one. On a Sunday or other holyday of obligation, I would.

The only time I’ve seen a dalmatic worn by a deacon was at a holy hour for vocations last month. A deacon was assisting the bishop (who presided over the holy hour); he was ordained a priest the next day. As I left the service to congratulate him on his upcoming ordination, I thanked him for wearing a dalmatic, and asked that if he was ever blessed by God to become a parish, and doubly blessed by God with a deacon, he encourage and support his deacon wearing a dalmatic.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

Much of this is controlled by the individual pastors. It can vary from one parish to another, at least in my archdiocese. Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[japhy]

I would rather see Deacons focusing on what they are ordained to do … preach the gospel, serve the people, minister to the needy… than run around after mass explaining over and over that they are not a priest.

The exaggeration doesn’t help the discussion. Nothing is preventing a deacon from wearing a dalmatic (the vestment proper to him) during Mass and preaching, serving, and ministering. And honestly, how many times would it have to be explained? How long does it take to remember your deacon’s face? How long does it take to recognize the difference between a (properly made) chasuble and a (properly made) dalmatic? How hard is it to catechize the faithful via the bulletin or a homily or an announcement after the Prayer after Communion?

 

[belgianwaffles9]

A couple of things here…

Lesser degree of solemnity probably refers to the rank of the celebration in question, not actually making the Mass less solemn. That would be a good reason for Fr. Deacon Ed omitting the dalmatic for daily Mass. The rank of the daily Mass is not typically a Solemnity.

That makes sense. My personal choice would be to wear it, but this explanation is perfectly logical.

Also, it’s not our place to question the design of the dalmatic. If a deacon wears a dalmatic that looks too much, in a lay person’s opinion, like a chasuble, that’s not a reason for the deacon to cease wearing it. There may be a myriad of reasons, all innocent, as to why the deacon wears that particular dalmatic, and none of them may have anything to do with a desire to be a “mini-priest.” Of course, if that’s the reason he’s wearing it, the matter is still between him and his pastor, and none of our business.

I disagree that is is none of our business. Laymen and women do have the right to a reverent mass, and if they have a suggestion of a way to make it more reverent, or have an issue with the way mass is being said, they can and should present their ideas and concerns to their priest. Of course, they should do it in a humble and respectful manor, but they have the right to a reverent and beneficial mass, and things like vestments are a part of that.

Of course there are many innocent reasons why that design of dalmatic can be worn. I have nothing against that design. I merely agreed with the previous point, that if a deacon purposefully wore a dalmatic that appeared to be a chasuble with the intention of presenting himself as more “priestly” rather than as a deacon, i would request he cease wearing that design if i were his pastor. And, as a layman, i might discuss with the pastor my concerns. It is my right and duty to do so.

Also, the rubrics, while a bit vague, do not mandate the use of a dalmatic. There could be a myriad of innocent reasons why a deacon is not wearing one at Mass.

Yes, and we have been discussing many of them here, or maybe you did not see. We talked about expense as a good reason not to, and possibly weather, and a few have agreed that for masses which are less solemn they would not expect to see them.

Better we concern ourselves with our own preparation for receiving the Lord than on fretting over the vestments of the deacon.

Dont forget: Having a beautiful and reverent mass is a PERFECT way to call to our attention our Lord Jesus Christ’s sacrifice for us, which prepares us to receive Him in the Eucharist. And no one can deny that vestments are an integral part of the mass, rich in symbolism, history, and tradition. Beautiful vestments can help raise our thoughts toward the heavens, and towards our Lord who dwells there. Therefore, a layman OUGHT to be concerned with any and every detail of the liturgy, right down to a deacon’s vestments.

 

[MusicMan]

I would suspect that in many cases, the parishes lack dalmatics for the deacons to wear, and the deacons lack funds to purchase their own.

The parishes may be unable to shoulder the burden for the expense of dalmatics for the deacons to wear, as they would need a dalmatic for, at least, each liturgical color, if not each season.

Furthermore, in my parish, our pastor does not wear a chasuble except for the highest holy days. Because of several compounding health issues, he has been permitted by the Bishop to omit the chasuble. I would believe it to be improper for a deacon in our parish to vest in a dalmatic when our pastor is not wearing a chasuble. In fact, when a deacon assists, he is vested in an alb and stole.

 

[jmdsc]

If mass were celebrated in a school gymnasium, they might dispense with some of the formalities for practical reasons… QUOTE]

I must humbly disagree. If you are holding mass in a school gymnasium, wouldn’t you want to make things as formal as possible to bring the focus to the liturgy?

Whether we like to admit it or not, we (by “we” I mean all of us with vision) use all the art and environment to assist us in spirituality. That is the reason it is there!

 

[MusicMan]

Dont forget: Having a beautiful and reverent mass is a PERFECT way to call to our attention our Lord Jesus Christ’s sacrifice for us, which prepares us to receive Him in the Eucharist. And no one can deny that vestments are an integral part of the mass, rich in symbolism, history, and tradition. Beautiful vestments can help raise our thoughts toward the heavens, and towards our Lord who dwells there. Therefore, a layman OUGHT to be concerned with any and every detail of the liturgy, right down to a deacon’s vestments.

However, if the deacon’s vesture meets the requirements of the rubrics, then our personal aesthetic is irrelevant.