Priests and cassocks

[HomeschoolDad]

FWIW, the Polish word for cassock is “sutan”, derived from French, pronounced the same way. I was once telling my son’s grandfather (who does not speak English) “mam wlasny sutan” — “I have my own soutane” (from when I used to serve the TLM). “Inherited” it from an ex-seminarian who wanted me to have it. Dziadzio served the TLM in his youth, so that was one more thing we had in common.

Just to clarify, “Dziadzio” is my son’s grandfather, not the ex-seminarian. It’s similar to the Yiddish word “zaydeh,” and means the same thing, just as the word for “grandma” is “babcia”, similar to the Yiddish “bubbe”. One time my son had written it — “Ja Joe”, precisely how it’s pronounced. Very funny!

“Soutane” is just another term for cassock (not sure which language).

It’s French.

While here is a “semi-Jesuit cassock”

That is a very smart-looking cassock.

None of these things are bad in and,of themselves. It is the attitude that tends to come with the changes that bother so many. That “I am the priest and I know better than any of you.”

It’s the attitude they have.
That “they”(the young, new,priests) are the only ones who take their vocations seriously, that they are responsible for “fixing” what all the priests before them have done, etc…

Mirabile dictu!

There’s a lot of clean-up to be done, many of the laity have no clue what they are supposed to believe, or how to live a Catholic life, and somebody’s got to do the heavy lifting. I thank God that these young men are being raised up to set things right. Just putting it mildly, things got a little slack in recent years.

Traditional Catholic faith, morality, liturgy, and spirituality aren’t an annual, they’re a perennial.

 

[CilladeRoma]

Yes, it is horrible. A lot of the joy has left the parishes affected.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

Yes, it is horrible. A lot of the joy has left the parishes affected.

Why is that? Jesus is still present. We are all still members of the body of Christ. Why should a change in pastor steal your joy?

 

[CilladeRoma]

Not my joy. But the joy of the people affected by sweeping changes made by a young, new priests who didn’t even bother to get to know their parishes first and basically told them everything they have been doing for the last 50 years is wrong.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

In my diocese we have had a couple situations like that. Parishes where the priests were well meaning, but did not stick to the GIRM. New priests, faithful to their vocations and their instructions from the bishop, began celebrating mass as the church instructs and the parishioners revolted.

On the one hand, I understand how difficult that must have been for them, but on the other hand, you can’t really expect a new priest to continue clear abuses of the past.

 

[CilladeRoma]

Did I say anything about abuses?

There was no abuses going on, just things the new, young, priests don’t like.
These parishes no longer have Communion under both species, have only boys 8-17 serving at the altar, have the priest saying the Eucharistic prayer in Latin, doing away with the sign of peace for the congregation.

It is not right for a priest come make sweeping changes with little to no discussion, especially when there was nothing to “fix” to begin with.

 

[CilladeRoma]

Mirabile dictu!

There’s a lot of clean-up to be done, many of the laity have no clue what they are supposed to believe, or how to live a Catholic life, and somebody’s got to do the heavy lifting. I thank God that these young men are being raised up to set things right. Just putting it mildly, things got a little slack in recent years.

Traditional Catholic faith, morality, liturgy, and spirituality aren’t an annual, they’re a perennial.

There was nothing wrong with any of the things going on at any of these parishes.
It was that some of the new, young, priests didn’t like certain things, so they changed them to things that they wanted or thought were “better” with little to no regard for the people who had been members of the parish for years.

You can try to defend it all you want with your Latin insults, but what some of these young priests are doing reeks of clericalism and hubris.

 

[dochawk]

An eastern deacon I knew in PA had a long, non-tuckable clerical shirt with four front pockets. He wore it to KofC meetings and other church-related matters (which was required by his bishop). It was clearly clerical, and also clearly different than what priests wore . . .(which I presume was the purpose of the design!)

 

[HomeschoolDad]

There was nothing wrong with any of the things going on at any of these parishes.
It was that some of the new, young, priests didn’t like certain things, so they changed them to things that they wanted or thought were “better” with little to no regard for the people who had been members of the parish for years.

You can try to defend it all you want with your Latin insults, but what some of these young priests are doing reeks of clericalism and hubris.

And likewise, there is nothing wrong with the changes that you cite. Any of those are the priest’s prerogative. And there is always the option of filing a complaint with their bishop.

During the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, many changes were introduced that no one asked for, people were happy with things the way they were (for the most part — they knew nothing else), that people had to have explained to them by “experts” who could help them see them why the changes were good. I’ve been through it. I’ve had “experts” sit me down and try to persuade me. I know of one parish in rural West Virginia where the bishop demanded that the church be renovated. The marble communion rails, paid for by the sacrifices of immigrants, were smashed and taken to the county dump. The pastor who refused to do this was removed from the parish, and replaced by a priest who enthusiastically pressed forward. I would say that some people didn’t like this. I would also say that they eventually came to terms with it after the matter was “explained” to them. “Obedience”, don’t you know.

Sometimes the pendulum has to swing the other way before it can come to equilibrium.

 

[CilladeRoma]

During the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, many changes were introduced that no one asked for,

The Church asked for those changes, it was not like everyone in the pews decided, hey, let’s do our own thing.

As far as the changes made by the priest, yes and no. None of them are “pastors”, so coming in and changing things that are totally in line with the GIRM and diocesean policy with no warning or explanation, then telling people who ask questions that it is “better” because you say so is a type of hubris and clericalism that the Church does not need.

The parish is its people, priests come and go. The people have a rights too.

 

[QuD]

The parish is its people, priests come and go. The people have a rights too.

Parishioners (as individual faithful) have rights. Parish is not “its people”, people belong to a certain parish. A parish is an elementary territorial (or personal, sometimes) ecclesiastical governance unit, entrusted by the Church to a parish priest to rule, teach and sanctify. So if there is a revolt, demanding a priest to deviate from Church legislature, it is unjust and unfounded. Of course, it is an obligation of the parish priest to address that with compassion and love for souls and their salvation (as this is the supreme law).

 

[CilladeRoma]

it is an obligation of the parish priest to address that with compassion and love for souls and their salvation (as this is the supreme law).

And when that doesn’t happen, which in the cases I am talking about, it did not, it is a form of clericalism on the part of the priest. And that is not a good thing.

 

[CTBcin]

Then why let men who aren’t even Deacons yet wear clerical attire?

We had a group of seminarians who wore them everywhere. It was crazy. I get it if they were at seminary, but it was during the summer when they were home and working in parishes. The Deacon couldn’t wear clerical attire, but the first year seminarians could?

Sorry, but that is ridiculous.

The rule where I’m from is if a seminarian has received candidacy, he wears clerics at the seminary and in ministry situations (such as a summer parish assignment). Candidacy usually comes around I Theology, as definitely not first year.

While I generally support allowing seminarians to wear clerics, I do find it odd that deacons aren’t allowed to wear clerics, at least when ministering. They are full clerics and should have the rights and privileges of their office.

 

[Fauken]

While I generally support allowing seminarians to wear clerics, I do find it odd that deacons aren’t allowed to wear clerics, at least when ministering. They are full clerics and should have the rights and privileges of their office.

In my diocese, Deacons wear a grey cleric shirt while priests wear black. It helps distinguish them at least.

 

[CilladeRoma]

In my diocese, seminarians start wearing clericals their very first semester at seminary.
They wear them while home on vacation, both in Church setting and in non-Church settings. I ran into a group of them having dinner. All in clerics, not a priest or deacon among them.
I did ask about it, and was told that the Bishop allowed it. Not a good idea in my mind, but…

 

[EnglishTeacher]

There was no abuses going on, just things the new, young, priests don’t like.
These parishes no longer have Communion under both species, have only boys 8-17 serving at the altar, have the priest saying the Eucharistic prayer in Latin, doing away with the sign of peace for the congregation.

It is not right for a priest come make sweeping changes with little to no discussion, especially when there was nothing to “fix” to begin with.

This is interesting. I have seen this very thing happen in a parish I am familiar with.
The priest was not young (older side of middle age), but I believe he was a late vocation, so in some ways he was like a new priest. Many of the changes he made were good, but he made them extremely fast, and it had the effect of driving many parishioners away. This was far from being a “liberal” or heterodox parish; in fact if anything, it leaned more traditional, but the effect was off-putting to many because his attitude was that the parish needed to be “fixed.” I think people actually would have been open to most of the changes if he had made them gradually as he got to know the parish, but instead he came in and started changing everything within the first few weeks of arriving.

I will say, though, from my own experience, the young priests in our diocese who are new out of seminary are cautious about making quick changes, even if they prefer more traditional practices themselves. I have observed a wise humility in them, even if finding the balance in this area is not always easy. Whoever of their superiors in forming/advising them in this area has done well, I believe.

 

[CTBcin]

In my diocese, seminarians start wearing clericals their very first semester at seminary.
They wear them while home on vacation, both in Church setting and in non-Church settings. I ran into a group of them having dinner.

Even our guys in candidacy only have permission to wear clerics outside the seminary when they are in the parish or in a ministry setting. Only during deaconate year do seminarians get to wear clerics wherever they want. I’m not sure what I think (as a seminarian myself) of letting first-year seminarians go wherever in clerics. I wouldn’t find it prudent to allow that if I were a bishop. But that being said, I’m not a bishop.

 

[CTBcin]

I think that white clerics are more common in hot/tropical places. For example: the Philippines. It makes sense. However, I do see the occasional Western priest wear a white or blue clerical shirt, and I tend to find it a bit odd.

 

[dochawk]

I think that white clerics are more common in hot/tropical places.

Nah, my priest wears one.

Oh, wait, I’m in Las Vegas, and we’re just coming off summer . . . a month ago, it was still well over 100F coming out of liturgy . . .

 

[dochawk]

Yeah, most of the year

But they’re threatening us with a low of 38F next week, and I have to figure out whether to put up the plastic on the hothouse a month an d a half early!