I don’t know about the history of the fiddleback chasuble, except that the “Gothic” (full) style has been in use for centuries, and many priests in warm climates appreciate the fiddleback for its relative coolness. I believe that this might be a reason for its invention.
Vatican II did not abolish any particular style of vestment, except for no longer requiring the maniple. Likewise, they did not abolish a particular style of music, so those old St. Gregory Hymnals can, and probably should, be resurrected along with the fiddlebacks and brocaded chalice veils. Just as modern styles were forced through by the liturgical music industry, those who create and sell vestments took advantage of the secular styles of the time to offer “modernized” vestments. Look in any liturgical catalogue and you’ll find gorgeous, traditional chasubles, made quite recently to meet demands by new priests and seminarians. On the next page can be found chasubles that resemble green drapes with cartoonish stalks of wheat, which, like the chunky, enameled brassware sold a few pages ahead, are often old stock unsold since the seventies. There is a difference between Vatican II and “the spirit of Vatican II.”
Chasubles were originally nicer versions of men’s outerwear, reserved for the liturgy: i.e., coats, covering enough of the body to reflect their history as offering protection from the elements, but not everyday coats. For the first several centuries, at least, they would not have had a fiddleback cut.
I think the stiffness and distinctive cut of the pre-Vatican II vestments have to do with practical aspects of elaborate embroidery and goldwork. Goldwork breaks if it is on a backing that is too flexible, and heavier stuff like gemstones would tear away from a light fabric. A heavier backing requires a smaller chasuble, both for freedom of movement in the arms and because the heavy backing doesn’t have such an attractive drape as a lighter fabric.
I think the flare-out down lower is just because the vestment makers didn’t want to lose any more of their canvas than they had to. In other words, that cut is basically as much stiff fabric as a man can practically wear while offering Mass. If you look at the blogs, you could not add a half-an-inch in any direction without having a garment that decided on its own whether to stand, sit or salute. Some may actually be over the limit of the one wearing them, actually; they were undoubtedly made for a larger man.
Likewise, some Gothic chasubles go the other way in order to highlight the attactive drape that a lighter fabric makes possible…sometimes a bit too far for my taste. My meaning: the garment should make us think “coat” or “cape”, sure, but not “tent”. There shouldn’t be room to hide more people under there.
In other words, I think the artists making chasubles have a tendency to push their medium to the limit, and sometimes over it, in an effort to show all the beauty that medium has to offer. They sometimes forget that the focus is on guy underneath or, forced by limited resources, make a Large and decide that it will just have to fit all sizes.
When the elaborate embroidery is taken off of a fiddleback chasuble, the need for such stiff fabric is entirely lost on me, save the desire to have a “traditional” look: parishes less affluent than the cathedral would go for a less elaborate version than the bishop’s vestments, but with a similar cut. Nevertheless, I’m thinking that a more-or-less fiddleback cut (that is, barely beyond the shoulder in the sleeve, but flaring out from the shoulder somewhat, for additional drape) in a beautiful silk might make a really nice vestment for hot situations.
Even if you don’t care for the fiddleback cut, the older vestments with all the handwork are priceless heirlooms of the Church. The artistry and skill are nearly unbelievable…it is hard to imagine human hands could accomplish it. No wonder they wanted every inch their bishops would give them.
If you think them ugly, consider that they were originally custom-made, even if they were made to outlast the original target. The original wearer may have had a much different shape. IMHO, if a one-size-fits-all sentiment that Gothic vestment makers were a little more able to get away with were abandoned by makers of fiddleback chasubles, some of the worst examples would be avoided.
So yes, IMHO: a bad Gothic fit is very bad, but a bad fiddleback fit is truly hideous, just because the stiffness of the fabric gives the garment more of a mind of its own. For that reason, altar societies are probably going to supply a selection of Gothic chasubles first, then add fiddlebacks as their resources allow. Very practical, altar societies. If you want your parish to have some fiddlebacks, you’d better consider raising the funds yourself.
