Priest's clothing

[Caesar]

Marriage is for the rank and file and not for the officers of Christ’s army. For, whereas food is a necessity for each individual, procreation is a necessity for the species only, not for the individual.

Longing for children? Children, many children, and a lasting trail of light we shall leave behind us if we sacrifice the selfishness of the flesh.

• St. Josemaria Escriva

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

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

How can you say we should all seek celibacy? We should all seek to love God with all our heart, mind, and soul. If renouncing marriage achieves that, then shouldn’t everyone be asked to seek celibacy?

We are all called to serve God with all our heart, mind, and soul. Christian love of spouse and neighbor does not diminish our love of God with all our heart, mind, and soul.

We do not all have the same vocations, yet where are we told some are celibate and some are less holy?
1 Cor 12:27-31 "Now you are Christ’s body, and individually members of it. And God has appointed in the church, first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, various kinds of tongues. All are not apostles, are they? All are not prophets, are they? All are not teachers, are they? All are not workers of miracles, are they? All do not have gifts of healings, do they? All do not speak with tongues, do they? All do not interpret, do they? But earnestly desire the greater gifts. And I show you a still more excellent way."

Of course we should look to the best examples.
Jesus Christ
Mary and Joseph: married
Moses, David, Abraham: all married

Michael

1 Tim 3:15, in context of 1 Tim 3:2 and 1 Tim 4:3

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

Marriage is for the rank and file and not for the officers of Christ’s army. For, whereas food is a necessity for each individual, procreation is a necessity for the species only, not for the individual.

Longing for children? Children, many children, and a lasting trail of light we shall leave behind us if we sacrifice the selfishness of the flesh.

• St. Josemaria Escriva

Catholic marriage is not a sacrament of the selfishness of the flesh. It is a reflection of the image and likeness of God, Sounds like what a priest is said to be? Why would the Church teach it needs to be consummated if that is a selfishness of the flesh?

Michael

 

[napad]

Are priests allowed to wear real clothes? Like aside from priest uniforms? Are do they wear their black uniform with the collar all the time outside of mass? Is it optional?

It doesn’t seem optional.
The Directory for the Ministry and Life of Priests, prepared by the
Congregation for the Clergy and approved by Pope John Paul II on
January 31, 1994, says:

In a secularized and tendentiously materialistic society, where even
the external signs of sacred and supernatural realities tend to be
disappearing, the necessity is particularly felt that the priest-man
of God, dispenser of His mysteries-should be recognizable in the
sight of the community, even through the clothing he wears, as an
unmistakable sign of his dedication and of his identity as a
recipient of a public ministry. The priest should be recognizable
above all through his behavior, but also through his dressing in a
way that renders immediately perceptible to all the faithful, even to
all men, his identity and his belonging to God and to the Church.

For this reason, the cleric should wear “suitable clerical clothing,according to the norms issued by the Episcopal Conference and according to legitimate local customs.” (Canon 284)
From an interesting article
WHY A PRIEST SHOULD WEAR HIS ROMAN COLLAR:
ewtn.com/library/PRIESTS/RMCOLLAR.TXT

 

[LilyM]

I think priests certainly should wear the collar whenever it’s not totally inconvenient to do so - which means it should be on probably 95% of the time - just as a married person should always wear their wedding ring.

 

[LilyM]

What did Jesus ride into Jerusalem, and why?

Michael

Yes he rode a donkey, that was to fulfil OT prophecy about the Messiah - that would ride on ‘an a@s, and the colt of an a@s’. It was a symbol of peace as opposed to war, even kings rode mules in peacetime, since horses were rarer and more valuable they were kept for war.

Remember that the people were all shouting and acclaiming Jesus as he went along - so he wasn’t exactly blending in with anyone!

Remember too that the robe he wore at his Crucifixion was fancy - woven seamlessly in one piece, which takes some doing. It was fancy enough that the soldiers are recorded as not having cut it into pieces, which they did with less valuable clothing, rather they cast lots to see who would get it.

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

The priest should be recognizable
above all through his behavior, but also through his dressing in a
way that renders immediately perceptible to all the faithful, even to
all men, his identity and his belonging to God and to the Church.

“The priest should be recognizable above all through his behavior,”

 Very true. And should be true for all Catholics.

“but also through his dressing in a way that renders immediately perceptible to all the faithful, even to all men, his identity and his belonging to God and to the Church”

 Is this possible? How does our attire render immediately perceptible to all the faithful, even to all men, his identity and his belonging to God and to the Church? What are we told about outside appearance?

 Mt 23:27 " Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which on the outside appear beautiful, but inside they are full of dead men's bones and all uncleanness."

Luke 16:15 "And He said to them, “You are those who justify yourselves in the sight of men, but God knows your hearts; for that which is highly esteemed among men is detestable in the sight of God.”

Mt 11:8 "“But what did you go out to see? A man dressed in soft clothing? Those who wear soft clothing are in kings’ palaces!”

1 Peter 3:3-4 “Your adornment must not be merely external–braiding the hair, and wearing gold jewelry, or putting on dresses; but let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in the sight of God.”

Michael

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

Yes he rode a donkey, that was to fulfil OT prophecy about the Messiah - that would ride on ‘an a@s, and the colt of an a@s’. It was a symbol of peace as opposed to war, even kings rode mules in peacetime, since horses were rarer and more valuable they were kept for war.

Remember that the people were all shouting and acclaiming Jesus as he went along - so he wasn’t exactly blending in with anyone!

Remember too that the robe he wore at his Crucifixion was fancy - woven seamlessly in one piece, which takes some doing. It was fancy enough that the soldiers are recorded as not having cut it into pieces, which they did with less valuable clothing, rather they cast lots to see who would get it.

Seemless does not necessarily imply fancy.

The soldiers might not have cut it, not because it was fancy, but because it was one piece. Something can be simple, and valuable because of the effort that went into it, not necessarily because it is fancy.

Michael

 

[LilyM]

Seemless does not necessarily imply fancy.

The soldiers might not have cut it, not because it was fancy, but because it was one piece. Something can be simple, and valuable because of the effort that went into it, not necessarily because it is fancy.

Michael

VALUABLE being the point. Everyone recognised its value, even those uneducated soldiers who were crucifying him.

And this robe was valuable enough to set it, and him, apart from those around him, for sure.

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

VALUABLE being the point. Everyone recognised its value, even those uneducated soldiers who were crucifying him.

And this robe was valuable enough to set it, and him, apart from those around him, for sure.

I don’t know how educated or uneducated the soldiers were.

Not everything that is valuable is fancy. It may have been the seemlessness itself that made it valuable. They might not have noticed until they went to divide it, and were not able to find any seems.

Michael

 

[tkdnick]

“but also through his dressing in a way that renders immediately perceptible to all the faithful, even to all men, his identity and his belonging to God and to the Church”

Is this possible? How does our attire render immediately perceptible to all the faithful, even to all men, his identity and his belonging to God and to the Church? What are we told about outside appearance?

You’re joking me right? You’re now arguing with The Church & The Holy Father about even wearing a collar???

How can a man wearing black with a white collar NOT be immediately identifiable as a priest? Do you see many people walking around in that attire? Is that the fashion statement where you live? I know if I saw someone in a black shirt with a white collar it would be an immediate recognition of that person as a priest. As a man set apart by God to care for His Church completely and at all times.

Mt 23:27 " Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which on the outside appear beautiful, but inside they are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness."

Luke 16:15 "And He said to them, “You are those who justify yourselves in the sight of men, but God knows your hearts; for that which is highly esteemed among men is detestable in the sight of God.”

Mt 11:8 "“But what did you go out to see? A man dressed in soft clothing? Those who wear soft clothing are in kings’ palaces!”

1 Peter 3:3-4 “Your adornment must not be merely external–braiding the hair, and wearing gold jewelry, or putting on dresses; but let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in the sight of God.”

What do any of these quotes have to do with a priest wearing his roman collar? Is the roman collar really all that fancy? What does it really cost? $40, maybe $60 bucks? For a black button up shirt and a white piece of plastic to cover his neck. Must mean he’s full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness huh?

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

You’re joking me right? You’re now arguing with The Church & The Holy Father about even wearing a collar???

How can a man wearing black with a white collar NOT be immediately identifiable as a priest? Do you see many people walking around in that attire? Is that the fashion statement where you live? I know if I saw someone in a black shirt with a white collar it would be an immediate recognition of that person as a priest. As a man set apart by God to care for His Church completely and at all times.

What do any of these quotes have to do with a priest wearing his roman collar? Is the roman collar really all that fancy? What does it really cost? $40, maybe $60 bucks? For a black button up shirt and a white piece of plastic to cover his neck. Must mean he’s full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness huh?

Did I agrue against a collar? No, I agreed with "“The priest should be recognizable above all through his behavior,” and then asked “How does our attire render immediately perceptible to all the faithful, even to all men, his identity and his belonging to God and to the Church? What are we told about outside appearance?”

Nothing wrong intrinsically wrong about wearing a collar. Notice that the Church teaches that the priest should be recognized above all through his behavior. Those verses are syngeristic with “The priest should be recognizable above all through his behavior.” Those priests who were involved in the scandal, is Mt 23P:27 relevant? Or 1 Peter 3:3-4?

Notice that one of the following was a Msgr. Dowling, would not his attire made it obvious the position and dedication to God and the Chruch that he held?
What did wearing the collar indicate for these priests?:
news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070413/ap_on_re_us/priest_abuse
foxnews.com/story/0,2933,48212,00.html
nctimes.com/articles/2005/06/04/special_reports/religion/19_54_436_3_05.txt

"Msgr. Philip J. Dowling, 75, who led St. Patrick Church near Philadelphia’s Rittenhouse Square until his retirement last year, was permanently barred from the ministry. He had been suspended in March.

Dowling told The Philadelphia Inquirer he had repeatedly fondled a teenage girl, saying he was “very sorry for the inappropriate acts and touches.” The newspaper said two sisters, now in their 50s, had said he had abused them. He denied one woman’s claim that he had raped her.

Dowling was not defrocked, a step that only the Vatican can take. Farrell told the newspaper she had no information on why. He was to be sent to a facility for counseling, and has “accepted a life of prayer and penance,” Farrell said."

Michael

 

[scylla]

Is it a principle of humilty then that you support?
This is a Biblical principle.
So by that same logic you must then support Discalced Carmelites wearing their habits.
discalcedcarmelites.com/

A simple robe and sandals? To be consistant they should wear it as much as possible correct?

Much the same way a priest wears a simple Roman habit and plastic collar.

In Christ
Scylla

Oh I see you are in favor of outside appearance and also behavior which I also am in favor of, is this correct?

 

[tkdnick]

Notice that one of the following was a Msgr. Dowling, would not his attire made it obvious the position and dedication to God and the Chruch that he held?
What did wearing the collar indicate for these priests?:
news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070413/ap_on_re_us/priest_abuse
foxnews.com/story/0,2933,48212,00.html
nctimes.com/articles/2005/06/04/special_reports/religion/19_54_436_3_05.txt

You seem to focus almost exclusively on the negative when it comes to attire. What about the positive? What about the hundreds of millions of priests who have served The Church faithfully and humbly? Shouldn’t we be focusing on them and not on the small number of people who abuse their position?

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

You seem to focus almost exclusively on the negative when it comes to attire. What about the positive? What about the hundreds of millions of priests who have served The Church faithfully and humbly? Shouldn’t we be focusing on them and not on the small number of people who abuse their position?

I have posted before that many of the priests I know are holy, repsectable men, who are a blessing to our Church. So discussing reality, that attire alone does not give us an indication or one’s interior, affirms what Scripture and the Church tells us "“The priest should be recognizable above all through his behavior,”. We hear this so often in Scripture, it is the fruit of our interior faith that is important, not outside appearances.

So, I am not intending to focus only on the negative, or to not give proper honor to those priests and lay persons who nurture and live their interior faith, whose fruits of that faith are their behavior, and not so much the exterior attire. The examples are a reminder, for ALL of us, that it is not the exterior appearance that should be the major message of our faith, it is our behavior, our words and actins and thoughts which are not hidden from God. Those priests in the links “fooled” alot of people by their attire and position. God was not fooled. And some discerning faithful who knew them may not have been fooled.

Michael

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

Is it a principle of humilty then that you support?
This is a Biblical principle.
So by that same logic you must then support Discalced Carmelites wearing their habits.
discalcedcarmelites.com/

A simple robe and sandals? To be consistant they should wear it as much as possible correct?

Much the same way a priest wears a simple Roman habit and plastic collar.

In Christ
Scylla

Oh I see you are in favor of outside appearance and also behavior which I also am in favor of, is this correct?

Simple and respectful does not mean one needs to go with robe and sandals. One can use discretion.

We are taught to be humble by Jesus. Being humble does not exclude dressing simply, or elegantly, at times. It is wear one’s heart is that matters.

A simple Roman collar and habit, seems simple. Whether the person is humble or not is a matter of the interior. Some may take pride in their simple attire (whether priest or lay person), others may wear simple attire and have behavior and words that are not the model of humility.

Michael

 

[scylla]

I agree with you, priests should be holy, humble and respectful both on the inside and on the outside.

Being dressed as a priest does not force one to be holy but simply is an outside witness of a call to holyness and sacrifice to God.

Failures on the part of Priests does not change this, it just is shameful behavior.

One’s heart is ultimately important and only God knows the heart, this doesn’t exclude the witness a habit exudes.

God Bless
Scylla

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

I agree with you, priests should be holy, humble and respectful both on the inside and on the outside.

Being dressed as a priest does not force one to be holy but simply is an outside witness of a call to holyness and sacrifice to God.

Failures on the part of Priests does not change this, it just is shameful behavior.

One’s heart is ultimately important and only God knows the heart, this doesn’t exclude the witness a habit exudes.

God Bless
Scylla

I like the way you said that. Do you think all Christians are clled to holiness and sacrifice to God?

Michael

 

[tkdnick]

I like the way you said that. Do you think all Christians are clled to holiness and sacrifice to God?

Michael

Of course!

 

[chicago]

Get your very own “clergy coat”, only $299:

zootsuitstore.com/Shopping/Catalog/product_detail.asp?ProductCode=ZSSOCC

I’d like mine in red, please!

And clerical shirts (not sure if they come with a plastic collar or not) run under $30. Might have to pick one of those up just to have one.