Diaconate Vestments at your church?

[Chatter163]

Until the rubrics were revised in 1955 and more thoroughly in 1960, the deacon and subdeacon wore folded chasubles during penitential Masses of Advent and Lent, instead of dalamtic and tunicle. From 1960 onward, this practice was suppressed.

 

[Pariah_Pirana]

Deacon Tony560:

The Dalmatic is worn at processions and benedictions except when these have a penitential character…Catholic Encyclopedia
So you are correct. You have a good knowledge this subject.

The Catholic Encyclopedia is extremely dated in some areas. This is one of them.

 

[Deacon_Tony560]

Actually this is right on in our diocese. We have one procession year at Easter Vigil. This is the only time that I wear my Dalmatic. It may vary by diocese.

 

[Hesychios]

Is the stole normally worn under the Dalmatic? and if so, why?

+T+
Michael

 

[Deacon_Tony560]

Hesychios:

Is the stole normally worn under the Dalmatic? and if so, why?

+T+
Michael

Great question! I have been looking for an answer, but have not found a good explaination yet. The history books trace the vestments back to ancient Roman tradition and even to Rabbi’s garb. The stole was actually a kind of inner coat that was changed to the strip around the neck for a priest (Crossed for the Cross of Christ) and the one the deacon now wears (Sign of clerical office). It might be that this is the order that the vestments took when actually being used as clothing worn on the street. The books say that the chasuble was an outer garment used to keep the cold and rain out. I will have to keep working on this. If you know, please share where you got it.

 

[Hesychios]

I was only curious because the stole is definately worn over the dalmatic in the Byzantine tradition, but the site link above (Melissa’s post) mentioned the dalmatic going over the stole.

So it seems like a big difference in how this garment has been adapted.

Some East Roman Empire fashion notes.

and more.

 

[Deacon_Tony560]

Hesychios:

I was only curious because the stole is definately worn over the dalmatic in the Byzantine tradition, but the site link above (Melissa’s post) mentioned the dalmatic going over the stole.

So it seems like a big difference in how this garment has been adapted.

Some East Roman Empire fashion notes.

and more.

Very interesting sites on the historical use of dalmatics.

 

[muledog]

It is diocesan policy here (Diocese of Lafayette, Indiana) that only transitional deacons may wear the dalmatic. Permanent deacons my only wear the alb and stole.

It’s a shame, because when our pastor of 30 years died in 2003, the new pastor took our old dalmatics (and chasubles and surplices as well) and gave them away.

In Manibus Dei,

Mike M.

 

[pgoings]

It is diocesan policy here (Diocese of Lafayette, Indiana) that only transitional deacons may wear the dalmatic. Permanent deacons my only wear the alb and stole.

It’s a shame, because when our pastor of 30 years died in 2003, the new pastor took our old dalmatics (and chasubles and surplices as well) and gave them away.

In Manibus Dei,

Mike M.

Mike,

If you don’t mind me asking, is it only your new pastor who told you this? Because a seminarian from Lafayette (now at the American College in Rome) claims that this is not true.

Thanks,

Paul

 

[Brendan]

pgoings:

Mike,

If you don’t mind me asking, is it only your new pastor who told you this? Because a seminarian from Lafayette (now at the American College in Rome) claims that this is not true.

Thanks,

Paul

Especially since GIRM 119 and 338 say that the dalmatic should be worn by deacons; except in cases of necessity or occasions of lesser solemnity.

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.

So one might make the case for weekday masses, or in parishes that cannot afford dalmatics; but otherwise they are to be worn.

 

[Brendan]

And here is Redemptionis Sacramentum on the subject

[125.] The proper vestment of the Deacon is the dalmatic, to be worn over an alb and stole. In order that the beautiful tradition of the Church may be preserved, it is praiseworthy to refrain from exercising the option of omitting the dalmatic

 

[Deacon2006]

In my church the deacon who proclaims the Gosple always wears dalamatic over his stole and alb and the other deacons who might be at the same mass to help with communion will only wear an alb and a stole.

God Bless

 

[otm]

stbruno:

Yikes, if you have deacons and they are considered Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist, then they have a serious problem. If they are participating in in the liturgy, then they should be on the altar vested doing their specific role.

That seems to be the equivalent of saying that any priest who is present at Mass must concelebrate.

The deacon has a role in the Mass, as set out in the GIRM, but I don’t see that it is mandatory. Perhaps I missed something, or it is elsewhere?

 

[Deacon_Tony560]

otm:

That seems to be the equivalent of saying that any priest who is present at Mass must concelebrate.

The deacon has a role in the Mass, as set out in the GIRM, but I don’t see that it is mandatory. Perhaps I missed something, or it is elsewhere?

Check Chap3-Offices and ministries of the Mass.

#61 note that the deacon is not an EM. The deacon is an Ordained minister.
#68 the EM comes under special ministries of the laity.

When I am not serving as a deacon at Mass, I sit with my wife and the rest of the parish community.

God bless you.

 

[otm]

Deacon Tony560:

Check Chap3-Offices and ministries of the Mass.

#61 note that the deacon is not an EM. The deacon is an Ordained minister.
#68 the EM comes under special ministries of the laity.

When I am not serving as a deacon at Mass, I sit with my wife and the rest of the parish community.

God bless you.

Sorry, but your answer is a bit non-responsive to what I wrote. The original thread was talking about the fact that they had deacons present at the Mass who did not assist at the Mass.

My understanding is that if a deacon is present and physically capable, he is to distribute Communion before an EMHC is used.
However, the previous writer said:

stbruno:

If they are participating in in the liturgy, then they should be on the altar vested doing their specific role.

That was what I was responding to. I would assume that if you were sitting with your wife, and got up to assist in dsitributing Communion that you would put on a stole, as a sign that you were ordained, as a priest would; but I do not understand either the role of a deacon or the GIRM to require that a deacon present at Mass be required to assist at the Mass, other than at Communion as before an EMHC.

Does my post make more sense? And your response?

 

[Deacon_Tony560]

otm:

Sorry, but your answer is a bit non-responsive to what I wrote. The original thread was talking about the fact that they had deacons present at the Mass who did not assist at the Mass.

My understanding is that if a deacon is present and physically capable, he is to distribute Communion before an EMHC is used.
However, the previous writer said:

That was what I was responding to. I would assume that if you were sitting with your wife, and got up to assist in dsitributing Communion that you would put on a stole, as a sign that you were ordained, as a priest would; but I do not understand either the role of a deacon or the GIRM to require that a deacon present at Mass be required to assist at the Mass, other than at Communion as before an EMHC.

Does my post make more sense? And your response?

Sorry if I missed your point. In our diocese, if I am sitting with my wife at Mass, I do not get up and help with Communion, even if only EMs are on the altar. At my parish, I assist at two Masses each week and all four Masses on my preaching weekend. I have not ran into a situation where I was there and did not vest. However, I could see this happen if I went to a neighboring parish that has no deacon and only EMs to help at Communion. Each parish plans their Liturgy around the help that they have. I believe the GIRM refers to a deacon being physically present on the altar.
In this case, he should be reading the Gospel as well as distrubuting Communion.

God bless

i

 

[Deacon_Canicus]

I’m amazed by this thread.

First, the STOLE is the vestment proper to all the ordained. It is worn over the left shoulder and fastened at his side by a Deacon, over the shoulders by a priest (used to be crossed at the chest in the old Mass) and by the Bishop hanging straight down (as priests and Bishops do now). In addition, Bishops wear the pectoral Cross (should be worn under the Chasuble).

The stole is always worn and should be worn under the chasuble or dalmatic. The damatic is the vestment proper to the Deacon - not the stole. The unfortunate practice of wearing just the stole is discouraged clearly in the GIRM and in recent documents on the liturgy. Deacons have worn only the stole for reasons of simplicity or to distinguish themselves from the priest - however people still call us “father” after Mass.

The Dalmatic should be worn at every Mass, and at the other occaisions when it is specified - it cannot be banned or restricted to “transitional” Deacons - there is NO difference in the Sacrament of Holy Orders received by a Deacon, transitional or otherwise.

By the way, a Bishop, who possesses the fullness of Holy Orders, should wear a dalmatic under his Chasuble (it’s a lighter weight, Episcopal dalmatic) though this practive has fallen by the wayside.

I know they are exepnsive - but every Deacon should have some - they don’t need to match exactly - vestments are not a “uniform”, though it always looks nicer when they do.

Deacons are NOT Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist. They are ordained and ordinary ministers to distribute Holy Communion at Mass.

Also, by the way, when presiding at a wake or funeral, liturgy of the hours or benediction, a Deacon would wear a stole and cope, as well as use the humeral veil when appropriate.

Amazing that after all these years we are still so poorly informed on the Diaconate.

 

[Sacramentalist]

Deacon Canicus:

I’m amazed by this thread.

First, the STOLE is the vestment proper to all the ordained. It is worn over the left shoulder and fastened at his side by a Deacon, over the shoulders by a priest (used to be crossed at the chest in the old Mass) and by the Bishop hanging straight down (as priests and Bishops do now). In addition, Bishops wear the pectoral Cross (should be worn under the Chasuble).

The stole is always worn and should be worn under the chasuble or dalmatic. The damatic is the vestment proper to the Deacon - not the stole. The unfortunate practice of wearing just the stole is discouraged clearly in the GIRM and in recent documents on the liturgy. Deacons have worn only the stole for reasons of simplicity or to distinguish themselves from the priest - however people still call us “father” after Mass.

The Dalmatic should be worn at every Mass, and at the other occaisions when it is specified - it cannot be banned or restricted to “transitional” Deacons - there is NO difference in the Sacrament of Holy Orders received by a Deacon, transitional or otherwise.

By the way, a Bishop, who possesses the fullness of Holy Orders, should wear a dalmatic under his Chasuble (it’s a lighter weight, Episcopal dalmatic) though this practive has fallen by the wayside.

I know they are exepnsive - but every Deacon should have some - they don’t need to match exactly - vestments are not a “uniform”, though it always looks nicer when they do.

Deacons are NOT Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist. They are ordained and ordinary ministers to distribute Holy Communion at Mass.

Also, by the way, when presiding at a wake or funeral, liturgy of the hours or benediction, a Deacon would wear a stole and cope, as well as use the humeral veil when appropriate.

Amazing that after all these years we are still so poorly informed on the Diaconate.

Thank you, Deacon, for a breath of fresh air. If only people stopped giving their own opinions and posted the views of the Church on these matters.

What you note about bishops and the dalmatic is interesting; I did not know this was still in effect; do you have documentation to this effect?

I tell ya, anytime I see a bishop wear the pectoral cross over his chasuble I wanna hit him in the face with a two-by-four . . .

 

[carattinij]

At Sunday Mass I wear the the alb, stole and dalmatic. During the week or during baptisms I wear the alb and stole. In my diocese, the policy is to wear the dalmatic during all solemn occasions including Sunday Mass.

                       Peace to all, 

                       Deacon Juan Carattini

 

[last_niceguy]

At my parish we do not have a Deacon.

However, my friend who is a Deacon at a parish not to far from mine was told by the Pastor to just wear the alb and the stole because it confused the faithful when he wore the dalmatic.