Dress Code for Clergy

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sugabee43
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Sugabee43

Guest
Can anyone tell me the official document/book that states the proper dress code for priests? I’m positive I read it in an old issue of ‘Catholic Answers’, but I really don’t want to sift through all of my back issues to find it!! :eek: It said something along the lines of priests being obligated to dress in their clerics when in public, regardless of being “on” or “off-duty”. My mom’s club was introduced to our new associate pastor today, and if I had seen him 2 minutes earlier, I never would have know he was a priest! Isn’t that akin to my walking around without my wedding band on - a denial of his vows?

Much thanks, amigos!
 
Canon 284 says: “Clerics are to wear suitable ecclesiastical garb according to the norms issued by the conference of bishops and according to legitimate custom.” This is further defined in the 1994 Directory for the Life and Ministry of Priests. In general, this states that the attire of a cleric should be different from that of the laity. In the United States the bishops issued a statement to the effect that “a black suit and Roman collar are appropriate attire for priests, especially in the exercise of their ministry. The use of a cassock in church or at home is at the discretion of the cleric.”

What the priest wears on vacation is not covered by this directive.

Since the topic is for “clergy” I’ll be complete. Deacons of the Latin Rite not going on to the priesthood are, in general, exempt from the requirement of wearing a collar (in fact, are generally prohibited). On the other hand, Eastern deacons generally do wear a collar, at least when they are serving in their capacity as deacon whether at Liturgy or other parish function.

Deacon Ed
 
A permanent deacon friend of mine moved to Virginia. He has a new bishop who wants him to wear the collar while ministering at the hospital, jail Etc. He feels kind of strange as the collar is not allowed here for permanent deacons.
The learning and knowledge that we have is, at the most,but little, compared with that which we are ignorant.
(Plato)
 
40.png
Sugabee43:
…Isn’t that akin to my walking around without my wedding band on - a denial of his vows?..
Click to expand...
Possibly the matter of priests’ wearing non-clerical clothing is similar to a decision not to wear a wedding ring, but only in that neither should be presumed to constitute a denial of vows or promises.

There are many good reasons a man or woman might elect not to wear a wedding ring. In my case it was because I worked in a graphics arts plant for many years, where half the time we were not allowed to wear any jewelry on our hands or arms that might scratch the vacuum frames, and the other half of the time I wouldn’t dare to wear it as I often had my hands in tanks of chemicals that would react in very ugly ways with gold and silver. Since then I have changed jobs, but I still don’t wear my ring as it has just become so uncomfortable to do so.

Just as I would not be pleased if someone were to think that I was somehow trying to deny my wedding vows by not wearing my ring, I would try not to judge a priest who chooses to wear civillian clothes. He might have very good reasons to do so, not that it is my place to judge his reasons.
 
Deacon Ed:
Since the topic is for “clergy” I’ll be complete. Deacons of the Latin Rite not going on to the priesthood are, in general, exempt from the requirement of wearing a collar (in fact, are generally prohibited). On the other hand, Eastern deacons generally do wear a collar, at least when they are serving in their capacity as deacon whether at Liturgy or other parish function.
Click to expand...
Fr Deacon Ed,
I find this very troubling. Deacons, yes even Latin Deacons 😃 , are clergy. The Roman Collar is not something only a priest should wear, neither is a cassock. Heck, seminarians are entitled to wear both, that is if their bishops allow it.

I think this sort of thing is just another way to blur the lines between the clergy and the laity.

Sad, so sad.
 
Deacon Ed:
Since the topic is for “clergy” I’ll be complete. Deacons of the Latin Rite not going on to the priesthood are, in general, exempt from the requirement of wearing a collar (in fact, are generally prohibited). On the other hand, Eastern deacons generally do wear a collar, at least when they are serving in their capacity as deacon whether at Liturgy or other parish function.

Deacon Ed
Click to expand...
Could you be more specific about the prohibition? I have seen deacons in our diocese wear a collar at times. Thanks.
 
I saw my Priest three times outside of “uniform” this week… Though, the public he is in all know him as a Priest, if not, someone else told them…
Kinda shocking though as I’ve never seen a Priest without a collar… I thought there were leash laws 😛
 
40.png
otm:
Could you be more specific about the prohibition? I have seen deacons in our diocese wear a collar at times. Thanks.
Click to expand...
Same here.

It my experience that the prohibition Deacon Ed meantions is more the exception that the rule. I see it mostly in CA and the a few East Coast states, but very little elsewhere.

The large majority of the dioceses seem to leave it up to the preference of the deacon himself.
 
40.png
Brendan:
The large majority of the dioceses seem to leave it up to the preference of the deacon himself.
Click to expand...
I’ve only ever seen our permanent deacon in his clerical collar.

I have seen both of our priests in regular clothing, although only in casual (and usually unexpected) situations. Once was when a priest came through the church in his sweatsuit and slippers to put a fresh candle in the red tabernacle lamp- if we hadn’t been there for evening choir rehearsal we’d never have seen him. Another time was when our pastor remembered about our St. Vincent de Paul clothing drive while he was watching a Red Wings game in the rectory. He came running out in his jeans and T-shirt to drop off his donations before the truck left.
 
The last time I asked the people at USCCB I was told that the “majority” of bishops did not allow their deacons to wear a collar. There are dioceses where the deacon wears a collar while he is ministering.

As a bi-ritual deacon I do have permission to wear one – but only when I am serving the Melkites. This led to an interesting problem several years ago. I was at the Los Angeles Religious Education Congress serving as a Melkite deacon at a booth sponsored by the Eastern Catholic Pastoral Association. I happened to go to lunch with a friend and walked by the new chancellor of our diocese, a nun whom I have known for years. She apparently took exception to my wearing a collar and raised a stink. It was quickly resolved (she was unaware that I was bi-ritual and had permission). My only issue was that if she had asked me I’d have told her – but she decided I was flaunting the rules.

The decision to permit a deacon to wear or not wear a collar is, according to canon law, actually up to the deacon – but since he requires faculties from the bishop, and since he made a promise of obedience to the bishop – we tend to do what they ask.

And yes, David, it does blur the line. It is simply another sign that the bishops and priests are still coming to grips with the reality of a restored permanent diaconate.

Deacon Ed
 
I know in my diocese that permanent deacons are not allowed to wear a collar. The reason that is always stated is that the deacons are often mistaken for priests and don’t like having to explain themselves all the time. There has been fair amount of talk to have deacons wear the collar, but with a grey shirt or some other identifying mark to seperate them from the priests.

Personally what is wrong with a deacon being mistaken for a priest, all he has to say is sorry I am a deacon and the discussion is over 90% of the time. The other 10% leads to a great chance to evangelize and/or catechize.
 
Another intersting point is that the late John Paul II, asked that all priests, deacons, and seminarians wear their clerics out in public while in Rome. As a result you see the Roman collar nearly everywhere you go in the morning.
 
I grew up around clergy, in that my father was an Episcopalian priest (very traditional, btw; my parents are now Orthodox!), and he was always very careful to wear his clerics in public, especially at church functions - even casual ones, such as barbeques. Obviously, he didn’t wear the collar when mowing the lawn, but he made a point to always be seen in clerical garb. I guess that’s the point of view from which I see it. No offense meant to anyone not wearing a wedding ring for specific reasons (although I think comfort level alone might be one to reconsider. It took me awhile to get used to mine, as well).

It is my opinion, also, that it blurs the lines between clergy and laity, and it’s very disconcerting. Maybe the comparison of collars to wedding rings was incorrect, but it still smacks of denial of sacramental vows to me. Pray for our priests, everyone!:gopray2:
 
I am not sure but I believe that deacons can wear the collar and I know that priests can, but sad as it is, I believe with all the bad press the clergy has been given lately many don’t want to go out in clergical garb…Really Sad!
 
Years ago at the Catholic elementary school I attended, the young priest who taught PE (physical education) to the boys during recess would not wear a collar. He did wear a black shirt and black slacks, I think. :clapping:
  • Kathie :bowdown:
 
Deacon Ed:
In the United States the bishops issued a statement to the effect that "a black suit and Roman collar are appropriate attire for priests, especially in the exercise of their ministry. The use of a cassock in church or at home is at the discretion of the cleric."
Click to expand...
Deacon Ed: Does that mean that a priest cannot wear his cassock all the time, ie., on the street as well as at church and at home?
 
40.png
flamingsword:
I know in my diocese that permanent deacons are not allowed to wear a collar. The reason that is always stated is that the deacons are often mistaken for priests and don’t like having to explain themselves all the time. .
Click to expand...
That again would seem to fall under the deacon’s preference.

If a deacon doesn’t mind educating the faithful, then by all means, wear the collar.

And do bishops in these diocese not allow seminarians and ‘transitional’ deacons to wear collars. Would not the faithful have the same confusion with them?

Having deacons not wear the collar beacuse of a lack of education of the faithful is a call to educate (a funtion of all Holy Orders, including the Diaconate).
 
And what’s up in San Diego??

It seems the ‘permanent’ deacons there are not even to be referred to as “Rev Mr.”. His Excellency has reserved that title for ‘transitional’ deacons. Is a ‘permanent’ deacon somehow less reverent that his seminarian counterpart?

When are certain bishops in this country going to get around to realizing that a deacon is a Ordained clergyman operating in a secular world, NOT a layman operating in a clerical role.
 
40.png
JKirkLVNV:
Deacon Ed: Does that mean that a priest cannot wear his cassock all the time, ie., on the street as well as at church and at home?
Click to expand...
No, it means that it’s his choice to wear one or not. Frankly, I’ve only seen one Latin Rite priest wear a cassock in the last 10 years or so outside of a liturgical setting. On the other hand, the priest at my Melkite parish always wears a cassock if he is wearing clerics.

Deacon Ed
 
40.png
Brendan:
And what’s up in San Diego??

It seems the ‘permanent’ deacons there are not even to be referred to as “Rev Mr.”. His Excellency has reserved that title for ‘transitional’ deacons. Is a ‘permanent’ deacon somehow less reverent that his seminarian counterpart?

When are certain bishops in this country going to get around to realizing that a deacon is a Ordained clergyman operating in a secular world, NOT a layman operating in a clerical role.
Click to expand...
Hmmm…I thought that all of California was agreeing to the same title: all deacons, transitional and permament were to be called “Deacon” and the title “Rev. Mr.” was scrapped (this title originally referred to priests, BTW).

All my mail from the Melktie Eparchy of Newton (the one to which I am assigned) comes addressed to “Rev. Deacon Ed Faulk” which, it seems to me, is the correct title. I still think (as do most Eastern prelates and priests) that the Latin bishops have a problem with understanding exactly where deacons fit and that we really are clergy, albeit married clergy (or, at least 98% of us are).

Deacon Ed
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top