Priest's clothing

[Mt_28_19_20]

Anyway, I’ll ask the opinion of the priest I serve under tomorrow in regards to the question of getting my own cassock and surplice.

I am also interested to what another priest I know, who dresses quite well in traditional clerical clothing, will wear when we go with a group to the symphony next week.

Sounds like a nice outing. When wearing clerical attire when going to the symphony, does that mean someone can ask for a blessing or confession if their conscience leads them to ask? Or would that not be the time to ask, more like personal time to enjoy the night out, but still nice to be recognized and be greeting based on attire?

Michael

 

[Caesar]

Sounds like a nice outing. When wearing clerical attire when going to the symphony, does that mean someone can ask for a blessing or confession if their conscience leads them to ask? Or would that not be the time to ask, more like personal time to enjoy the night out, but still nice to be recognized and be greeting based on attire?

Michael

A priest never ceases to be a priest, so if someone approaches the priest for reasons of a blessing or confession or advice, ect., then he should direct his attention to them and the more important situation (someone wanting to confess their sin is far more important then the symphony). In fact, this specific priest has told me that he likes when people will approach him on the street to ask advice, or for a blessing (little children especialy will run to him and ask for a blessing ), or even just to greet a priest who is walking down the street. I certainly would not mind that- in fact I think it is great when people will approach priests and seek advice and blessings.

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

A priest never ceases to be a priest, so if someone approaches the priest for reasons of a blessing or confession or advice, ect., then he should direct his attention to them and the more important situation (someone wanting to confess their sin is far more important then the symphony). In fact, this specific priest has told me that he likes when people will approach him on the street to ask advice, or for a blessing (little children especialy will run to him and ask for a blessing ), or even just to greet a priest who is walking down the street. I certainly would not mind that- in fact I think it is great when people will approach priests and seek advice and blessings.

This post surprised me, and made me smile.

Sounds like the paramedic at Mass today, who went over to help someone who fainted. They were obviously not at work, yet were eager to help out when needed unexpectedly.

Unless time was of the essence, I would not bother a priest who was out enjoying an evening of relaxation at the symphony.

Michael

 

[Caesar]

This post surprised me, and made me smile.

Sounds like the paramedic at Mass today, who went over to help someone who fainted. They were obviously not at work, yet were eager to help out when needed unexpectedly.

Unless time was of the essence, I would not bother a priest who was out enjoying an evening of relaxation at the symphony.

Michael

Well, this is why I believe that priests must be visible in society. He is not wearing the cassock and collar for the sake of fashion (although there is no needs to look terrible in public) but so that people will look at him on the street and see that he is a priest and that people may approach him if they feel the need to. When they see the priest, they see Christ and the Church. He should not hide this.

As a point of interest, several priests I know carry stoles with them (not large ones of course) and small bottles of holy water in case there is ever a need to administer the sacraments in an emergency (ie. a car accident or such and someone needs the Last Rites, or an emergency baptism, ect.- not ordinary occurances, but possible nonetheless).

And I would not bother a priest while he is relaxing or having a night out, but remember that he has given his life to the service of the Church, so if a person were to approach him to seek priestly advice, it should be no bother at all. Personaly, if I were a priest I would be happy that a stranger would ask my advice or for my services as a priest.

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

Well, this is why I believe that priests must be visible in society. He is not wearing the cassock and collar for the sake of fashion (although there is no needs to look terrible in public) but so that people will look at him on the street and see that he is a priest and that people may approach him if they feel the need to. When they see the priest, they see Christ and the Church. He should not hide this.

Well, this is why I believe that priests must be visible in society. He is not wearing the cassock and collar for the sake of fashion (although there is no needs to look terrible in public) but so that people will look at him on the street and see that he is a priest and that people may approach him if they feel the need to. When they see the priest, they see Christ and the Church. He should not hide this.

The paramedic was not wearing their paramedic attire. Yet they were still present and visible in society and ready to respond when the need suddenly arose. Several doctors also responded, and they were not wearing their white coats, yet doctors and nurses are always doctors and nurses, and present and visible in society. Neither the paramedic nor doctors were hiding their vocation, and are approachable.

Michael

 

[lak611]

The paramedic was not wearing their paramedic attire. Yet they were still present and visible in society and ready to respond when the need suddenly arose. Several doctors also responded, and they were not wearing their white coats, yet doctors and nurses are always doctors and nurses, and present and visible in society. Neither the paramedic nor doctors were hiding their vocation, and are approachable.

Michael

The difference is that the doctors, nurses and paramedics would not be identifiable by the general public, whilst the priests in clerical attire would be. No one would be able to seek out the medical staff if he was feeling ill. He would need to have some emergency happen, and the medical staff would need to come to the victim. It would be preferable if someone knew who the priest was before needing Annointing of the Sick.

 

[Spence06]

I don’t think a priest needs to be in his collar at all times, especially theres no real need for them to always be in a cassock. I mean, many priests I know can count on one hand how many times they have worn a cassock since their ordinations and all of them have been ordained for over 10 years.

With that said, I think a priest should be present in his collar when need be and not take it lightly. It does mean a lot more then the person but if you go out to the store to get milk and eggs on your day off as a parish priest, the need to wear a collar is minimum unless there are those priests/seminarians that will wear the collar for the perks, free food, discounts, ect.

My favorite line about when a man enters the seminary about “priestsly garb”, whether it has any truth you decide; The Church takes boys, dresses them up as girls and asks they act like men.

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

The difference is that the doctors, nurses and paramedics would not be identifiable by the general public, whilst the priests in clerical attire would be. No one would be able to seek out the medical staff if he was feeling ill. He would need to have some emergency happen, and the medical staff would need to come to the victim. It would be preferable if someone knew who the priest was before needing Annointing of the Sick.

When there is not an emergency, there is not need for them to be identifiable by the general public. When there is an emergency in a public place, often they will step up, having taken notice by usually means (a commotion or suddern gathering of people, a siren, people asking for help, etc.)

If there was a spiritual emergency, if there is a priest near by they could by similar means take notice and respond. If there is an accident or commotion, their attention could be obtained regardless of what they are wearing, as is true for doctors and nurses and paramedics.

If someone was ill and not in an emergency, they could seek out medical attention if urgent, or go to the doctor’s office or hospital.
Same with spiritual needs, if not an emergency, they could go to the Church or chapel. Baptism can be administered by a lay Christian if a priest is not available and time is thought to be short.

Michael

 

[lak611]

I don’t think a priest needs to be in his collar at all times, especially theres no real need for them to always be in a cassock. I mean, many priests I know can count on one hand how many times they have worn a cassock since their ordinations and all of them have been ordained for over 10 years.

With that said, I think a priest should be present in his collar when need be and not take it lightly. It does mean a lot more then the person but if you go out to the store to get milk and eggs on your day off as a parish priest, the need to wear a collar is minimum unless there are those priests/seminarians that will wear the collar for the perks, free food, discounts, ect.

I doubt if most priests wear collars for perks and discounts.

My favorite line about when a man enters the seminary about “priestsly garb”, whether it has any truth you decide; The Church takes boys, dresses them up as girls and asks they act like men.

There is nothing feminine about cassocks. This comment is insulting to priests.

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

There is nothing feminine about cassocks. This comment is insulting to priests.

Some of the styles might give the impression of a feminine touch. Of course we would supress that thought, and it is not meant as insulting. “Fluffy” shirts in certain styles might seem a bit feminine, again, not meant as an insult.

If the following cassock were not black, but a more feminine color, that might give more of a hint of feminine.

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bd/Cassock.jpg

Michael

 

[Spence06]

I doubt if most priests wear collars for perks and discounts.

I doubt most, but there are some and I know some who will use the collar for discounts and perks.

There is nothing feminine about cassocks. This comment is insulting to priests.

It has nothing to do with feminine or not, its a long black dress, essentially, and is called “man dress” from those who in their line of thought, have a more “liberal” mindset. Its just a funny line that I have heard thrown around by some. Like I said, there may not be any truth to it. I am just repeating what I hear in conversation with those who I know inside the Church.

 

[scylla]

Some of the styles might give the impression of a feminine touch. Of course we would supress that thought, and it is not meant as insulting. “Fluffy” shirts in certain styles might seem a bit feminine, again, not meant as an insult.

If the following cassock were not black, but a more feminine color, that might give more of a hint of feminine.

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bd/Cassock.jpg

Michael

If is the key word here, who cares if it was pink, polka dot or rainbow?

The Priesthood is a vocation that is lifelong, it is not a job like a paramedic. So there is no comparison.

The proper comparison would be a man ceasing to act like a husband when he is out of the house. Just because he is not near his wife does not mean that he can act like a single man and court other women.

A priest has dedicated his life to the salvation of souls, and must always be ready to offer confession, Mass and seek ways to bring people to Christ. There is no time off, just as a man has no time off from being a husband.
He cannot carouse with women when he is away from his wife, it is a lifelong commitment for God.

Priest’s clothing identify a priest as a man dedicated to service of Christ, to hide or make themselves invisible is to hide their light.
(Matthew 5:14-16) "You are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hidden. "Nor do they light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house. “Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven”

To only wear clothing when it is convenient is to seek the admiration of men, to do it at all times takes dedication and humility to realize God comes first.

In Christ
Scylla

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

If is the key word here, who cares if it was pink, polka dot or rainbow?

The other key word was “might”

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

If The Priesthood is a vocation that is lifelong, it is not a job like a paramedic. So there is no comparison.

The proper comparison would be a man ceasing to act like a husband when he is out of the house. Just because he is not near his wife does not mean that he can act like a single man and court other women.

Or a nurse or doctor. Just because they are not at the hospital, does not mean they cease to be nurses or doctors. It does not mean that if someone is hurt, they can act like they are not nurses or doctors. Regardless of whether they are in their professional attire, or casual street cloths.

Michael

 

[scylla]

There is a huge difference between a vocation and a job.

A nurse or a doctor pales in comparison to the importance of Salvation.

A vocation as a Priest is directly involved with a persons eternal welfare where a doctor or nurse is involved with just the physical life.

Just like a Father or Mother doesn’t take time off a Priest never takes time off, a vocation is different from a job.

Your right, might is important too in that example…

God Bless
Scylla

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

There is a huge difference between a vocation and a job.

A nurse or a doctor pales in comparison to the importance of Salvation.

A vocation as a Priest is directly involved with a persons eternal welfare where a doctor or nurse is involved with just the physical life.

Just like a Father or Mother doesn’t take time off a Priest never takes time off, a vocation is different from a job.

Your right, might is important too in that example…

God Bless
Scylla

Yes, there can be a difference between a vocation and a job.
Some people treat marriage as a vocation, others more like a job.
Some treat priesthood as a vocation, others more like a job.
Some treat being a doctor as a vocation, others more like a job.

A doctor, nurse, and priest all pale in comparison to salvation.
All Catholics, no matter what their vocation/job are called to witness and cooperate with God’s plan of salvation. Lay people have baptised, or facilitated baptism of those in apparent dire need when a priest is not available: part of salvation.

And yes, doctors, nurses, and priest do take time off. That does not mean they will not interrupt their time off when a need arises.

 

[scylla]

I would not say that there can be a difference, there is a difference.

A job is fundamentally different from a vocation.

Just because some people treat it differently sometimes doesn’t make an ounce of difference, this doesn’t effect reality.

Just because lay people have helped out in situations where it is necessary doesn’t change the reality that a vocation is something we are dedicated to. An exception
ecessity doesn’t change reality.
In the same way, if I help deliver a baby it doesn’t make me a doctor. Just because I might be called to baptise a baby in the time of need doesn’t make me a priest or change the job of a priest.

Regardless of the inadequacy of the scenario you put forth, the primary function of a Priest is to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and to hear Confession for the forgiveness of sins.

So again, we cannot compare a vocation and a job, they are two different things.
Simple example…
I do not get hired to be a husband, a priest is not hired to be a priest. My children always need to be able to count on me just like a Priest’s spiritual children need him to be a beacon of light to them. The more faithful thing to do is be a witness as much as possible. We should always seek the more faithful path, not the easiest.

God Bless
Scylla

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

I would not say that there can be a difference, there is a difference.

A job is fundamentally different from a vocation.

Just because some people treat it differently sometimes doesn’t make an ounce of difference, this doesn’t effect reality.

Just because lay people have helped out in situations where it is necessary doesn’t change the reality that a vocation is something we are dedicated to. An exception
ecessity doesn’t change reality.
In the same way, if I help deliver a baby it doesn’t make me a doctor. Just because I might be called to baptise a baby in the time of need doesn’t make me a priest or change the job of a priest.

Regardless of the inadequacy of the scenario you put forth, the primary function of a Priest is to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and to hear Confession for the forgiveness of sins.

So again, we cannot compare a vocation and a job, they are two different things.
Simple example…
I do not get hired to be a husband, a priest is not hired to be a priest. My children always need to be able to count on me just like a Priest’s spiritual children need him to be a beacon of light to them. The more faithful thing to do is be a witness as much as possible. We should always seek the more faithful path, not the easiest.

God Bless
Scylla

“doesn’t change the reality that a vocation is something we are dedicated to”

Exactly, and shows my example is not inadequate. And there are teachers and doctors who are dedicated and would/do perform their calling regardless of pay.

We are all called to a vocation, some multiple vocations. Some are called to the vocation of priest, some to the vocation of marriage, some to the vocation of teacher, some to the vocation of physician…

Regardless of the vocation, some chose to be dedicated to that call. And some chose to treat it more as a job.

“An exception
ecessity doesn’t change reality.” And the exception/nesessity does not change from being reality. If a lay person baptizes some, while not a priest, the reality of baptism remains.

" We should always seek the more faithful path, not the easiest."
So should we all seek to be celibates, the “holier” call than laity or married life? That married life, really think it’s all that easy compared to being a priest?

Michael

 

[scylla]

Yes, we should all seek celibacy. Some are not called to it and then should be married. It is holier to set oneself aside for God.

Again it doesn’t matter that some choose to take it like a job or fail in their vocation. That doesn’t change reality.
So what if I am a father and end up being a deadbeat that doesn’t change the definition of fatherhood.

We should look to the perfect example, not the failures as our models. We might fail but we should always strive for the more holy route, the more dedicated, difficult, faithful adherence to God first.

In Christ
Scylla

 

[AngelRose81]

Our priest wears the regular black pants, shirt, collar, and sometimes a black sweater vest or jacket. Never seen him wear anything else. But our associate pastor wears the black shirt & collar with jeans sometimes as well as sweatshirts and sweaters. In fact, he had on jeans today at Mass under his vestements b/c he (instead of our other priest) had to be the celebrant(sp?). Don’t know if he’s allowed to do that but I thought it was interesting!