Priests out of uniform

[Annabelle_Marie]

I didn’t get your tongue in cheek. resolved. However, I am a stay at home dad by choice while I return to school. We don’t have family to take up any slack. Priest too are not always available either. I was a seminarian and lived in a rectory for a bit, enough to have done things with priests like friends. My best friend is a priest. I don’t expect them to wear the clerics, I just expect them to always act like a priest. I always act like a dad, because that’s what I am. Pope John Paul II said the same thing. He said that if the clergy had been acting like the fathers they are the scandals would not be so overwhelming - crude paraphrase. I know our pastor doesn’t wear his garb on his day off. It’s only clothing to me. The clerics do not make the priest no more than my dad shirts make me a dad. I’d be perfectly content if the norm was for them to wear normal clothing like the rest of us. But that’s not the norm. I just think priest should be proud to wear their clerics. I also think that the true conversion is interior, not the exterior - clerics. I missread your post just as my posts have been misinterpreted, whether my fault or others.

I guess the biggest part I didn’t get was your comment =QUOTE] I feel a lot of clergy and religious would do much better if they understood the nature of their vocation better. Parents don’t change identities to hide or confuse people. Why should religious and clergy? I didn’t get how a priest was changing his identity by wearing casual clothes on his day off. Any more then a parent is changing his/her identity by changing clothes. Or…I change my marital status by taking off my wedding ring. There are some places were it’s dangerous for my husband to wear his. He’s still married…he’s not trying to fool anyone. Granted…as you stated above…he should still act like a priest and not do anything that would create a scandel but I don’t know any priests that would do that.

 

[Love_the_Lorax]

Some activities would be a bit silly in the traditional garb… last week I saw one of our priests in the gym working out. Surely can’t fault him for working to stay healthy! Another time, I was telling a priest that I was feeling guiltly for not being up front about being Catholic to my Dad, that perhaps I was setting a bad example for my children, etc… (Dad is hugely anti-Catholic). The priest said that sometimes when he is out to Borders or such, he just wants to be himself for a bit and doesn’t always wear the Roman collar. IOW, it isn’t a sin to not always advertise our religious beliefs.

 

[FrCorey]

Some activities would be a bit silly in the traditional garb… last week I saw one of our priests in the gym working out. Surely can’t fault him for working to stay healthy! Another time, I was telling a priest that I was feeling guiltly for not being up front about being Catholic to my Dad, that perhaps I was setting a bad example for my children, etc… (Dad is hugely anti-Catholic). The priest said that sometimes when he is out to Borders or such, he just wants to be himself for a bit and doesn’t always wear the Roman collar. IOW, it isn’t a sin to not always advertise our religious beliefs.

a priest is still a priest even in his swimming costume.

 

[PbloPicasso]

I guess the biggest part I didn’t get was your comment =QUOTE] I feel a lot of clergy and religious would do much better if they understood the nature of their vocation better. Parents don’t change identities to hide or confuse people. Why should religious and clergy?

I didn’t get how a priest was changing his identity by wearing casual clothes on his day off. Any more then a parent is changing his/her identity by changing clothes. Or…I change my marital status by taking off my wedding ring. There are some places were it’s dangerous for my husband to wear his. He’s still married…he’s not trying to fool anyone. Granted…as you stated above…he should still act like a priest and not do anything that would create a scandel but I don’t know any priests that would do that.
Annabelle Marie, lovely name, even if its not your real one. I think all of us have a tendency to not realize what we’re sounding like when others read our words. Many of us, especially me, tend to throw thoughts together thinking people will at least read them lightly and not too deep. Sometimes we expect people read our minds almost. If there is one thing I learned over the years, it’s that I can quickly insult anyone with my style of writing. As a math/science nut I always tell young people to read a lot and write as often as you can. Be willing to make your mistakes while you’re still young so that when you reach my age you’ll be able to communicate more effectively. I missed the boat because I went to 12 different schools growing up before college. I was more concerned about where I’d be, who my new friends, if any, would be and all that jazz. The most stability I had was in the Army and that is where I finally began to learn to write, but too late along the road. I wish I had learned to write good when I was much younger. I try, but I still do a poor job at it, obviously. If I get in a “low mood” I really do much worse. Lately I’ve been in the dumps with all of the chaos surrounding us. Christmas has become a time that I celebrate the anniversary of my mother’s passing. The closer I get to it the more insane I become. She hated Catholics, me. She gave me a hard time all my life over my faith and showed her resentments by writing me out of her Will. So, yea, I get pretty moody and it comes out in my writing. Don’t read too much into anything I say for a while. After the new year I’ll probably get my faculties back. Sure, I can write but sometimes in my clowning or sarcastic way convey some good messages. In reality it really doesn’t matter what I feel about clergy wearing their uniform/habits. I think that my opinion is worthless for the most part because I’m still learning, neophyte Catholic. that tries to make sense when I write. I’m tired and rambling now. I’m preparing for finals now, middle aged man going back to school.

 

[dans0622]

What are the rules about the clergy and uniforms outside of the mass and does the Church not encourage that they be worn?

Hello fkb,

Here is the particular legislation for the United States. In all 11 meandering pages of this thread, I do not believe anyone referenced it directly.

"… The National Conference of Catholic Bishops, in accord with the prescriptions of canon 284, hereby decrees that without prejudice to the provisions of canon 288, clerics are to dress in conformity with their sacred calling.

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.

In the case of religious clerics, the determinations of their proper institutes or societies are to be observed with regard to wearing the religious habit. …"

You can also find various exhortations. For example, there is this from John Paul II in Vita consecrata: “Since the habit is a sign of consecration, poverty and membership in a particular Religious family, I join the Fathers of the Synod in strongly recommending to men and women religious that they wear their proper habit, suitably adapted to the conditions of time and place.Where valid reasons of their apostolate call for it, Religious, in conformity with the norms of their Institute, may also dress in a simple and modest manner, with an appropriate symbol, in such a way that their consecration is recognizable. Institutes which from their origin or by provision of their Constitutions do not have a specific habit should ensure that the dress of their members corresponds in dignity and simplicity to the nature of their vocation” (n. 25).

I hope this helps answer your question.

Dan

 

[padreb]

Hello fkb,

Here is the particular legislation for the United States. In all 11 meandering pages of this thread, I do not believe anyone referenced it directly.

"… The National Conference of Catholic Bishops, in accord with the prescriptions of canon 284, hereby decrees that without prejudice to the provisions of canon 288, clerics are to dress in conformity with their sacred calling.

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.

In the case of religious clerics, the determinations of their proper institutes or societies are to be observed with regard to wearing the religious habit. …"

You can also find various exhortations. For example, there is this from John Paul II in Vita consecrata: “Since the habit is a sign of consecration, poverty and membership in a particular Religious family, I join the Fathers of the Synod in strongly recommending to men and women religious that they wear their proper habit, suitably adapted to the conditions of time and place.Where valid reasons of their apostolate call for it, Religious, in conformity with the norms of their Institute, may also dress in a simple and modest manner, with an appropriate symbol, in such a way that their consecration is recognizable. Institutes which from their origin or by provision of their Constitutions do not have a specific habit should ensure that the dress of their members corresponds in dignity and simplicity to the nature of their vocation” (n. 25).

I hope this helps answer your question.

Dan

Thanks Dan…I was going to post this this morning but hadn’t gotten around to it yet.

 

[fkb]

Dan and Padreb–

Sorry I have not returned to this thread for a few days. Thank you both very much for the citations.

Being in my 40s and coming from a traditional Catholic background, it was apparent to me that things changed since the time I was an altar boy and was very active in the diocese. The use of the recognizable clergy garb has noticeably declined, which has caught the attention of both laity, clergy, and church officials (per the citation).

What is clear from all the comments in this thread is that everyone has expressed sincere concern for both (1) Clergy and (2) Church tradition. On the one hand, we want our holy clergy to be recognizable to the general public, which inherently serves as a witness of the faith. On the other hand, we genuinely care about the welfare of our clergy – Lord knows we are in dire need of them. Consequently, we do not want to be overbearing, much less, a stumbling block to recruitment and retention. I don’t get the sense that any objections have been raised about occasional dressing down or attire appropriate for specific activities. Rather the concerns are more about the growing trend of lack of “uniformity” – nothing more.

Anyway, where I had thought that the Church was not aware of what I was personally noticing, I am humbled that they are on top of things. Also, all the contributions made to this thread have been insightful and show how much concern individuals have.

Aloha!

FKB

 

[fkb]

“Since the habit is a sign of consecration, poverty and membership in a particular Religious family, I join the Fathers of the Synod in strongly recommending to men and women religious that they wear their proper habit, suitably adapted to the conditions of time and place.Where valid reasons of their apostolate call for it, Religious, in conformity with the norms of their Institute, may also dress in a simple and modest manner, with an appropriate symbol, in such a way that their consecration is recognizable. Institutes which from their origin or by provision of their Constitutions do not have a specific habit should ensure that the dress of their members corresponds in dignity and simplicity to the nature of their vocation” (n. 25).

To me this is beautifully explained and adeptly conveys how I see the clergy in habit.

FKB

 

[hosemonkey]

I had the honor and privilege of serving my country for 22 years in the United States Navy, in war and peace. Part of that service was the wearing of a uniform. This uniform proclaimed who I was and what I was a member of and was worn with great pride, reflecting on my branch of service and the heritage that I shared in. It also bore witness to the countless other heroic men who had also worn that uniform with great distinction over the centuries. Even during the dark days of the Vietnam war, when wearing the uniform could get one spat upon or assaulted, I wore the uniform. Even in the face of ridicule, I wore the uniform. More than one fight resulted in it’s defense. I was never discouraged from wearing the uniform and would have been dishonored by the suggestion. Our priests and religious have discretion in the wearing of their own distinctive “uniform”, the habit. It marks them as “set apart” , and is a source of inspiration and pride for most of us Catholics. For myself, I believe that, in light of the scandals that have plagued the Church of late, many priests may be reluctant to be identified as Catholic clergy, but they should take courage and again proclaim who they are and wear the garb of their calling, even if it means a risk. People need the sign.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

I had the honor and privilege of serving my country for 22 years in the United States Navy, in war and peace. Part of that service was the wearing of a uniform. This uniform proclaimed who I was and what I was a member of and was worn with great pride, reflecting on my branch of service and the heritage that I shared in. It also bore witness to the countless other heroic men who had also worn that uniform with great distinction over the centuries. Even during the dark days of the Vietnam war, when wearing the uniform could get one spat upon or assaulted, I wore the uniform. Even in the face of ridicule, I wore the uniform. More than one fight resulted in it’s defense. I was never discouraged from wearing the uniform and would have been dishonored by the suggestion. Our priests and religious have discretion in the wearing of their own distinctive “uniform”, the habit. It marks them as “set apart” , and is a source of inspiration and pride for most of us Catholics. For myself, I believe that, in light of the scandals that have plagued the Church of late, many priests may be reluctant to be identified as Catholic clergy, but they should take courage and again proclaim who they are and wear the garb of their calling, even if it means a risk. People need the sign.

So just a point of clarification.

You wore your uniform 24/7 when ever you left your bed-room?

 

[hosemonkey]

So just a point of clarification.

You wore your uniform 24/7 when ever you left your bed-room?

Until late in the war, sailors below a certain pay grade were forbidden to possess civilian clothes aboard ship or on shore bases. If one wished to wear civilian clothes, membership in a so-called “locker club” was necessary. One rented a locker in which to store civilian clothes, changed out of uniform, changed back into uniform before going back to the ship. It was just too much trouble. Aboard ship, one stored one’s total earthly possessions in a locker two by two feet square, not leaving much room for civilian clothes. So, to answer your question, yes, if you were aboard ship, you wore your uniform 24/7. In later years more latitude was allowed, but I still wore my uniform.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Until late in the war, sailors below a certain pay grade were forbidden to possess civilian clothes aboard ship or on shore bases. If one wished to wear civilian clothes, membership in a so-called “locker club” was necessary. One rented a locker in which to store civilian clothes, changed out of uniform, changed back into uniform before going back to the ship. It was just too much trouble. Aboard ship, one stored one’s total earthly possessions in a locker two by two feet square, not leaving much room for civilian clothes. So, to answer your question, yes, if you were aboard ship, you wore your uniform 24/7. In later years more latitude was allowed, but I still wore my uniform.

Which all of these rules were laid out for you in the Uniform Code of Justice, correct? The laws of the military.

So, as an analogy, priests have just a set of laws, called the Code of Canon Law, which spells out that a priest should be in clerical dress when he is ministering. It goes no further, does not spell out how a priest is to dress on “his own time”.

So if the UCJ did/does not spell out what one must wear when off duty would you expect everyone in the military to wear their uniforms at all times?

 

[Aramis]

Which all of these rules were laid out for you in the Uniform Code of Justice, correct? The laws of the military.

Actually, it’s a product of the Navy Regulations, not the UCMJ.

Tho’, in the 19th C, enlisted were, in fact, expected to be in uniform at all times when out of their tent, save when on home leave. As still are trainees in all services.

There is a longstanding tradition of uniforms off duty in the US. Especially in the military. The UK military had similar rules, historically, and the Russian (Imperial and Soviet, both) Military, as well.

Not wearing uniforms when off duty is a 20th century notion.

 

[Young_Thinker]

While I feel that a priest or brother should wear their habit or clericals for the majority of the time, I do not see anything that is wrong with a priest wearing a polo-shirt or turtleneck once in a while, especially if he has a Cross or other Christian symbol visibly about his person. When I wanted to be a physician, I found the idea of “casual Fridays” to be charming, as long as “casual” does not mean wearing a t-shirt and denim trousers. At the same time, though, since nuns and religious sisters are not clerics in any way, they should have habits. I hate when a sister does not have a habit of any sort but instead constantly dresses like a laywoman, even if she does make use of a cross-pin or the like.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

While I feel that a priest or brother should wear their habit or clericals for the majority of the time, I do not see anything that is wrong with a priest wearing a polo-shirt or turtleneck once in a while, especially if he has a Cross or other Christian symbol visibly about his person. When I wanted to be a physician, I found the idea of “casual Fridays” to be charming, as long as “casual” does not mean wearing a t-shirt and denim trousers. At the same time, though, since nuns and religious sisters are not clerics in any way, they should have habits. I hate when a sister does not have a habit of any sort but instead constantly dresses like a laywoman, even if she does make use of a cross-pin or the like.

Some religious institutes do not have a habit by the design of their founders.

 

[Young_Thinker]

Some religious institutes do not have a habit by the design of their founders.

I know, but it would be nice if they did. Just something that distinguishes them from the crowd and looks like it glorifies God. Men whose religious communities do not have habits can usually wear cassocks or clerical shirts if they wish; the women cannot do that. Most secular clothing, in my opinion, is so ugly nowadays anyway.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

I know, but it would be nice if they did. Just something that distinguishes them from the crowd and looks like it glorifies God. Men whose religious communities do not have habits can usually wear cassocks or clerical shirts if they wish; the women cannot do that. Most secular clothing, in my opinion, is so ugly nowadays anyway.

I am sorry but I believe that we must respect the wishes of the founders of these religious institutes. I believe and trust that 1) they know what they are doing and 2) they are being guided by the Holy Spirit.

I believe a habit is important, but then I also joined an Order with a habit. I did look into a group that has no habit and while they are a great group I knew that they were not for me. That is not a statement against that group, it is a statement about me.

Maybe I would be a better person/catholic without an attachment to the habit, but alas I am human and not perfect.

But I will not take anything away from a community that has no habit whose founder founded them in that way. Now the groups that were founded with a habit by their founder who later got rid of it, I think they need to go back to their founder’s wishes.

 

[Young_Thinker]

I am sorry but I believe that we must respect the wishes of the founders of these religious institutes. I believe and trust that 1) they know what they are doing and 2) they are being guided by the Holy Spirit.

I believe a habit is important, but then I also joined an Order with a habit. I did look into a group that has no habit and while they are a great group I knew that they were not for me. That is not a statement against that group, it is a statement about me.

Maybe I would be a better person/catholic without an attachment to the habit, but alas I am human and not perfect.

But I will not take anything away from a community that has no habit whose founder founded them in that way. Now the groups that were founded with a habit by their founder who later got rid of it, I think they need to go back to their founder’s wishes.

I see what you saying, Brother. I also love when you or Br. J.R. speak from your own experiences.

 

[FrCorey]

Now there is a idea. casual wear for clergy. that whats we need.

 

[hosemonkey]

Which all of these rules were laid out for you in the Uniform Code of Justice, correct? The laws of the military.

So, as an analogy, priests have just a set of laws, called the Code of Canon Law, which spells out that a priest should be in clerical dress when he is ministering. It goes no further, does not spell out how a priest is to dress on “his own time”.

So if the UCJ did/does not spell out what one must wear when off duty would you expect everyone in the military to wear their uniforms at all times?

It is not my purpose to be argumentative with you, merely stating my opinion. But, as some professions are not merely “jobs” ie: Clergy, Police officers, Firemen, Paramedics, EMTs, members of the military etc, we are are held to a higher standard than others and are set apart by our calling and identified by our distinctive garb. As a professional Fireman/Paramedic and as a member of the military, I was held accountable for my conduct both on and off duty. As a paramedic, I was bound by law to render aid in an emergency, both on and off duty. I must believe that clergy are bound by the same rules. Does that have anything to do with wearing clericals? Perhaps not, but folks like us are basically “on duty” all the time and perhaps should be identified as members of this special “calling.” Just my two cents.