Question: Is the Cassock obligatory in the EF?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mattjolley
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I thought you wanted to be the Old Colonel’s research assistant. 😎

But that you may be edified I offer you this…

(Excerpts from “Redemptionis Sacramentum”)

No 123: “‘The vestment proper to the Priest celebrant at Mass, and in other sacred actions directly connected with Mass unless otherwise indicated, is the chasuble, worn over the alb and stole.’ Likewise the Priest, in putting on the chasuble according to the rubrics, is not to omit the stole. All Ordinaries should be vigilant in order that all usage to the contrary be eradicated.”

No. 126: “The abuse is reprobated whereby the sacred ministers celebrate Holy Mass or other rites without sacred vestments or with only a stole over the monastic cowl or the common habit of religious or ordinary clothes, contrary to the prescriptions of the liturgical books, even when there is only one minister participating. In order that such abuses be corrected as quickly as possible, Ordinaries should take care that in all churches and oratories subject to their jurisdiction there is present an adequate supply of liturgical vestments made in accordance with the norms.”

Note: No mention of cassock
 
Last edited:
Well, does R. Sac apply to the EF? I’m not sure, with Summorum Pontificum and all coming around a few years later… I feel like R. Sac applies to the OF rather than the EF
 
Indeed, it does apply. However, it does say that the rubrics indicated in the liturgical book as regards vestments should be followed as well. So, one would have to research the rubrics of the particular Missal being used. I’m not currently within reach of my library, so perhaps someone could enlighten us on that topic. I do however, own a number of vintage EF Missals and will research them once I return home. Yet, I have never seen any rubric making a cassock obligatory for a celebrant. The cassock, along with surplace or cotta, is customary choir dress for priests, deacons and instituted acolytes.
 
Last edited:
Then what is?

I’ve seen pictures of priests, even Fr. Emil Kapun, a man on the road to sainthood, celebrating Mass on the hood of a Jeep wearing his BDU under vestments.

So, in answer to the OP, if you have it and circumstances allow for its use, yes. use it.

If you don’t have it, or there are extenuating circumstances, it’s fine to go without, IMO.
 
Maximilian75 said:
Then what is?
Click to expand...
In general, whether a Cassock is required in the offering of the Extraordinary Form of the Mass. There was no question as to whether extenuating circumstances would allow for variation to the rule.
 
Last edited:
What was actually called for at Mass in '62 was that the priest has “dressed himself in appropriate attire which outwardly reaches at least to the ankle.” That, in practice, was a Cassock or perhaps a Habit. What you mention is the bare minimum allowed today and is pre-Summorum Pontificum; referring to the Roman Rite of Mass in the Ordinary Form, then the calendar of 2004 when the document quoted was released (Summorum Pontificum is from 2007). Otherwise we might have a pretty good argument for girl altar servers in the EF as well.
 
I am unaware of whether the cassock is obligatory in the EF. The current legislation on clerical attire, per the Code of Canon Law, is that the manner of clerical dress is to be left to each regional episcopal conference to decide, so as to allow greater latitude for adaptations suitable to climate and culture in each place. In the United States, the USCCB have ruled that the preferred clerical attire is the black suit with the clerical shirt in some form (there are different kinds of them, but it’s all basically the same effect, you have a white collar of some kind on your neck), and that the use of the cassock is at the discretion of the cleric. So if you want to wear a cassock all the time, you are more than welcome to in the US. If you want to only wear it liturgically, and wear the suit while out and about, you are welcome to do that as well. And if you want to go through your entire priesthood never having touched a cassock, you are also more than welcome to do that.

I wear a cassock most of the time, except when I’m flying on an airplane. And I don’t necessarily wear it because of some kind of agenda-related affiliation or anything like that. I wear it because it’s much easier to get dressed and do laundry at that point. I wear a t-shirt and shorts and tall socks underneath it, and the shorts, with lots of pockets, facilitate easier carry of my daily gear. In short, I wear cassocks mostly because I’m lazy and don’t like doing laundry all the time.

I will say that the broad majority of us don’t really spend a whole ton of time or energy on this. The cassock or clerical shirt/suit, both of which are legitimate options for us to wear, are our work uniform. The more important thing is what we do while we wear them. It’s funny to me that this topic is one of so much discussion by people who don’t actually ever have to wear either thing–I used to be the same way, honestly, back when I was in college and before clerical attire became a part of my everyday life. But now, it really is just in the background for me. I have much more important things to spend my time and energy on than worrying about what I’ll wear. I seem to recall a passage from the Gospels about that…

-Fr ACEGC
 
edward_george1 said:
In short, I wear cassocks mostly because I’m lazy and don’t like doing laundry all the time.
Click to expand...
I probably wouldn’t like it either, but my wife won’t let me touch her laundry machines (except to install or repair, of course 🤔:roll_eyes:)

hawk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top