[EDITED]Permanent Deacons in Formation wearing clerical dress?

[Ocarm]

Canon Law rules in the Deacon’s favour. He may wear clericals after Ordination if he should so desire.

Actually, that’s not entirely true.

*Can. 284 Clerics are to wear suitable ecclesiastical garb according to the norms issued by the conference of bishops and according to legitimate local customs.
*

See vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__PY.HTM

Rulings from Bishops cannot supersede Canon Law.

Yes, but canon law frequently gives bishops the power to dispense a law, or as in this case, to determine the detail of how a law is applied.

 

[Brendan]

You may be technically right, but deacons also promise obedience to their bishop, and in my diocese - and in many other US dioceses - the bishops have said “no collar,” and made it an issue of obedience. I wish it were otherwise.

Obedience, by definition, do not apply when the person in question does not have the authority to issue the instruction.

 

[Brendan]

At the very least, the Deacon can wear a cassock without issue of disobedience

The USCCB has set the norm on that, per Canon 284, ( Can. 284 Clerics are to wear suitable ecclesiastical garb according to the norms issued by the conference of bishops and according to legitimate local customs._

The recognito on this has been granted by Rome.

In liturgical rites, clerics shall wear the vesture prescribed in the proper liturgical 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.

usccb.org/norms/284.htm

 

[Brendan]

Yes, but canon law frequently gives bishops the power to dispense a law, or as in this case, to determine the detail of how a law is applied.

You are correct, a bishop can dispense from the obligations of certain Canon Laws.

But a dispensation removes an obligation. In the case of clerical garb, a bishop might dispense a priest from wearing clericals at certain liturgies.

What a bishop cannot dispense is a right of the cleric. If a cleric has a right to wear certain garb ( such as a cassock), then the bishop may not remove that right.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Let me clarify something:

Im talking about PRIOR to ordination.

In Australia seminarians get around in clerical dress outside of liturgy and i am curious why deacons in formation cant do the same? A seminarian who is not a transitional deacon is on the same playing field as a person who is in formation for diaconate, they are just your ‘average joe’ undertaking theological studies. so why then does a seminarian get the gear and not the formative deacon?

Ive actually heard some clerics comment at mass “they are just the same as seminarians, why dont they do it?” i think that there still is the big divide issues inside the clergy. the deacon vs priest thing.

Here is part of the difference as I see it.

A seminarian is a full time theologian (student of theology) and studying for the priesthood. A deacon in formation is a part time student who has a secular job/presence.

After ordination, a transitional is usually working full time in the Church where as many, if not most, permanent deacons still have a secular job/presence outside of their religious one.

IMHO I think deacons, all deacons, should wear clerical dress when they are actually ministering. A permanent deacon should not wear clerical dress when he is performing his secular functions/job.

 

[DCNBILL]

Here is part of the difference as I see it.

A seminarian is a full time theologian (student of theology) and studying for the priesthood. A deacon in formation is a part time student who has a secular job/presence.

After ordination, a transitional is usually working full time in the Church where as many, if not most, permanent deacons still have a secular job/presence outside of their religious one.

IMHO I think deacons, all deacons, should wear clerical dress when they are actually ministering. A permanent deacon should not wear clerical dress when he is performing his secular functions/job.

Amen, I would have looked pretty silly in the lab wearing a cassock.

 

[paperwight66]

Amen, I would have looked pretty silly in the lab wearing a cassock.

Indeed. As would our local plumber. Who also happens to be a Permanent Deacon.

 

[Protoclete]

Yes, it is sad.

Canon 284: Clerics are to wear suitable ecclesiastical garb according to the norms issued by the conference of bishops and according to legitimate local customs.

Deacons and priests are clerics, and therefore have the right and obligation to wear the cassock, clerical suit, or whatever has been determined as clerical garb in that locale.

Canon 288 releases deacons from the obligation, unless it is asserted in force by local law, but they retain the right to clerical garb. There is nothing that indicates a bishop has the right to deny clerics their right to clerical dress.

Seminarians, like all lay people who are not clerics, are forbidden from impersonating clerics, ie, wearing clerical dress. However, this rule seems to be ignored frequently. Personally, i think it should be more strictly enforced. A seminarian or deacon candidate is still a student. You don’t get med students calling themselves doctor or law students impersonating lawyers. Seminarians are not priests, and are still lay men until they are ordained.

Alternatively, other lay people engaged in full time pastoral ministry should be allowed clerics, or some adapted form of them. If a student can wear clerics, why not the person already engaged in the kind of ministry the student is preparing for? (E.g., a pastoral associate, or hospital chaplain).

One difference common in the Byzantine tradition is that celibate clergy (deacons or priests) wear black, whereas married clergy (deacons or priests) wear grey. This seems like a good way to respect both the clerical state, and the state of life.

 

[andrewstx]

In our diocese deacons are not allowed to wear clerical dress at all.

No dalmatics or even deacon’s stoles?

 

[Tarpeian_Rock]

No dalmatics or even deacon’s stoles?

I’m sure the poster means “clerical dress” in the sense of the Roman collar – as opposed to “clerical vestments” on the altar. Obviously it would be an abuse to have a deacon the altar without the stole. Although I have known of pastors who do not let their deacons wear dalmatics, supposedly to avoid “confusion” lest the parishioners think the deacon is actually another priest - despite what the GIRM says on the subject.

 

[garn9173]

That’s true in our diocese - for permanent deacons. Transitional deacons wear clericals.

Yep, we had a transitional deacon doing “on the job training” this summer in our Parish and he wore the collar. Next summer, he’ll be ordained a Priest.

 

[TrueLight]

Seminarians, like all lay people who are not clerics, are forbidden from impersonating clerics, ie, wearing clerical dress. However, this rule seems to be ignored frequently. Personally, i think it should be more strictly enforced. A seminarian or deacon candidate is still a student. You don’t get med students calling themselves doctor or law students impersonating lawyers. Seminarians.

However, you do sometimes see medical students in scrubs and unless one stares at their I.D.'s, one won’t know the difference. In fact, it is common for patients to address medical students as doctors, because they may not realize they are medical students doing third year rounds.

The FSSP seminary students wear the full cassock. I’m not sure if they wear them right when they start seminary, but I know at some point they do.

That must not make you happy at all.

They’re not impersonating priests because:

1. This is what their community requires;
2. If someone approaches them and asks if they are priests, they are sure to clarify that they are not.

http://img594.imageshack.us/img594/8253/fsspseminarians.jpg