Should priests wear their clerics when out grocery shopping? Getting a haircut? Seeing a movie? Walking the dog? Away on vacation?

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

You are describing someone like a baptist preacher who has a family to worry about. We are not speaking of protestant clergy, but dedicated Catholic priests. A Catholic priest should NEVER decline confession to any Catholic. Sure, go outside the store into a car, meet him at a near by parish, etc. But he should drop what he is doing (and most will) and do God’s will!

A priest that feels the same way as you just described should find another vocation, as he would not be a true servant of God.

This is unfair and unrealistic. A priest is a much a person as any protestant minister and has a right to a personal life and time. To say that he should never be rushed when performing personal errands is absurd.

I am sorry but I have a big problem with those laity that think a priest is on call 24/7 for anything that they want of him.

Again, there is a time and place for the Sacraments. Confessions can be scheduled if one can not make the times that they are available at the parish Church. They do not need to be made in the grocery store aisle or in the parking lot outside.

I can hear Christ now (following your description), “Sorry Mary Magdelene, I am running personal errands at this time. Could you please fetch me that drink of water so I could be on my way”.

As for this comment… It is a misrepresentation of what I am saying and not very fair of you. I will not respond in kind but if it continues I will totally stop replying to you.

 

[pnewton]

This is unfair and unrealistic. A priest is a much a person as any protestant minister and has a right to a personal life and time…

Not to mention that it is untrue to say priest have no family. Many do. Even those that don’t have a church family to tend to that requires practical matters, not only spiritual direction.

A physician that is worth anything at all will always be willing to respond to a person needing emergency ministration. Yet what physician would be of any use to his patients if he had to work 24/7 even answering stupid and mundane questions?

A priests has many duties, not just the ones we see at Mass. No parishoner should sit at judge over the one in authority over him.

 

[JReducation]

Isn’t there a “brother’s collar” which has no opening as opposed to the Roman Collar?

There is such a collar, but all the Franciscan Orders were founded as Orders of Brothers. It has always been part of the tradition that any priest who joins the order must conform to living as a Brother. There is not special rank or identifying uniform for priests among Franciscans.

The friars have always worn the same habit and the same collar. The rule and constitutions forbid any kind of distinction between the Brothers. No one is to aspire for any entitlement of any kind. Even our bishops wear the habit of the order. The Dominicans follow the same practice.

A different collar would create a distinction between one brother and another. The last General Chapter decreed that the friars must return to the orignal titles of Brother or Friar and drop the title Father, except for Francis. But that is slower in coming, because in many countries the laity is used to calling everyone Father.

Any distinctive dress would be in conflict with the roots fo the order.

Among the Secular Franciscans the rule is very explicit, all members, clerics, married members, single members and religious must dress according to custom without distinctions of rank or role in the Church, except in liturgy.

Hope this helps.

JR

 

[ethelzguy]

There are times for the Sacraments, they are not always available on demand. The exception is in cases of emergencies where death is possible.

Exactly. To me, the lack of consideration shown by someone who would accost a priest in public wanting to have a confession heard while not in a state of emergency, strikes me as being an occasion of sin in itself. Talk about selfish…

 

[Cobbfmly]

In Portugal, the Orthodox priests I know have a kind of ‘vacations’, which consists in travelling to the most touristic locations in order to provide Confession and Mass to the faithful.

One of the priests where I work takes “vacations” by signing up with a cruise line to provide masses, confessions, etc for several (2-3) cruises during the summer. He doesn’t have to pay for the cruises for free by doing this.

 

[Cobbfmly]

Not to mention that it is untrue to say priest have no family. Many do. Even those that don’t have a church family to tend to that requires practical matters, not only spiritual direction.

Our current pastor has four daughters and several grandchildren. He became a priest at 50 yrs old after adopting and raising, on his own, his four orphan nieces.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

This issue is a matter of discipline that seems to keep coming up here on the forum as many others do every couple of weeks/months.

In matters of discipline it is okay for us to have different views as long as we follow what the competent authorities say and to understand that what they say is not evil.

It seems that some people forget this and wish to have their view, be it clergy wearing clerics all the time, communion on the tongue, the use of Latin only, kneel for reception of the Eucharist (just to name a few), looked upon as dogmatic and any competing view as evil and they go as far as vilifying those who hold other views.

It has been pointed out that we are not protestants, something that I thought was self-evident, but I guess it was not as someone felt the need to point this out.

So I will point out that we are not Bible only Christians and while we can look to the Bible for answers we also have Tradition.

But when one does read the Bible it is important to note, I believe, that even Jesus found it necessary to spend time alone, either totally by himself or with just his disciples.

Just look at the end of the Sermon on the Mount.

Matthew 14:22-23
Then he made thedisciples get into the boat and precede him to the other side, while he dismissed the crowds.
After doing so, he went up on the mountain by himself to pray, When it was evening he was there alone.

Or this from Luke.

Luke 5:15-16
The report about him spread all the more, and great crowds assembled to listen to him and to be cured of their ailments,
but he would withdraw to deserted places to pray.

Just something to think about.

Also we must remember that Jesus is God and we are not. So if Jesus saw the need to have time to Himself, all the more that we need time to ourselves.

 

[Joysong]

ByzCath:

This issue is a matter of discipline that seems to keep coming up here on the forum as many others do every couple of weeks/months.

In matters of discipline it is okay for us to have different views as long as we follow what the competent authorities say and to understand that what they say is not evil.

Well said, Brother David. As we take your advice and spend that quality time in prayer, it would be wise to reflect on something I heard today in spiritual direction. Look not at the “What”, but the “Why.”

Why … do some people oppose the disciplines and practices licitly permitted by the Church?

Why … do they promote agendas to influence a change that correlates with their views, rather than respect individual consciences and choices?

Why … do they harbor anger towards those who will not conform to their esteemed ‘traditions?’

The priest indicated that when we discover the reasons behind our whys instead of concentrating on the whats, it may be the jumpstart to healing.

 

[JReducation]

Well said, Brother David. As we take your advice and spend that quality time in prayer, it would be wise to reflect on something I heard today in spiritual direction. Look not at the “What”, but the “Why.”

Why … do some people oppose the disciplines and practices licitly permitted by the Church?

Why … do they promote agendas to influence a change that correlates with their views, rather than respect individual consciences and choices?

Why … do they harbor anger towards those who will not conform to their esteemed ‘traditions?’

The priest indicated that when we discover the reasons behind our whys instead of concentrating on the whats, it may be the jumpstart to healing.

I will add my support to Joysong and Brother David. Not only is there nothing wrong with following what the Church allows, but it is invasive to push an agenda on someone who is not interested and has no obligation to be interested.

That kind of pushing violates justice. If the Church gives someone a choice on something, it is against justice for us to push our particular view point as the only choice or the correct choice. Justice requires that we do make ourselves into authorities over others when we do not have such authority.

Fraternally,

JR

 

[ASimpleSinner]

As a probable future priest, I intend to wear a cassock all the time (I know I’ll be in great pain in the summer), except doing sports.

Food for thought:

1. 
   *]They have summer weight cassocks
   *]From the photos I have seen at my old seminary, one CAN play baseball in a cassock!

 

[Aramis]

You are describing someone like a baptist preacher who has a family to worry about. We are not speaking of protestant clergy, but dedicated Catholic priests. A Catholic priest should NEVER decline confession to any Catholic.

Better check canon law…

not all priests may hear confessions (except for immanent threat of death situations), and without the bishop’s permission, ordered priests may only hear confessions of those within their community, or living with their community yet not members (as sometimes happens).
CIC:

Can. 964 §1. The proper place to hear sacramental confessions is a church or oratory.

§2. The conference of bishops is to establish norms regarding the confessional; it is to take care, however, that there are always confessionals with a fixed grate between the penitent and the confessor in an open place so that the faithful who wish to can use them freely.

§3. Confessions are not to be heard outside a confessional without a just cause.

So, no, in the store is NOT canonically allowed, unless some good cause exists (like, for example, a penitent who is unable to attend due to work schedules).
CIC:

Can. 966 §1. The valid absolution of sins requires that the minister have, in addition to the power of orders, the faculty of exercising it for the faithful to whom he imparts absolution.

§2. A priest can be given this faculty either by the law itself or by a grant made by the competent authority according to the norm of ⇒ can. 969.

Note: orders alone are NOT enough!
CIC:

Can. 967 §1. In addition to the Roman Pontiff, cardinals have the faculty of hearing the confessions of the Christian faithful everywhere in the world by the law itself. Bishops likewise have this faculty and use it licitly everywhere unless the diocesan bishop has denied it in a particular case.

§2. Those who possess the faculty of hearing confessions habitually whether by virtue of office or by virtue of the grant of an ordinary of the place of incardination or of the place in which they have a domicile can exercise that faculty everywhere unless the local ordinary has denied it in a particular case, without prejudice to the prescripts of ⇒ can. 974, §§2 and 3.

§3. Those who are provided with the faculty of hearing confessions by reason of office or grant of a competent superior according to the norm of cann. ⇒ 968, §2 and ⇒ 969, §2 possess the same faculty everywhere by the law itself as regards members and others living day and night in the house of the institute or society; they also use the faculty licitly unless some major superior has denied it in a particular case as regards his own subjects.

So, if his bishop grants the priest permission to hear confession, he may hear confession until it’s revoked.
CIC:

Can. 968 §1. In virtue of office, a local ordinary, canon penitentiary, a pastor, and those who take the place of a pastor possess the faculty of hearing confessions, each within his jurisdiction.

§2. In virtue of their office, superiors of religious institutes or societies of apostolic life that are clerical and of pontifical right, who have executive power of governance according to the norm of their constitutions, possess the faculty of hearing the confessions of their subjects and of others living day and night in the house, without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 630, §4.

The list of who can do so by the law itself…

1. Bishops of a diocese or exarchate, by being bishops of a place, have authority to hear confessions. (Ordinaries, §1.)
2. Pastors, by virtue of being Pastors, have permission by the law to hear confession in their parish or from their parishioners. (Pastors, §1).
3. Acting Pastors, while serving as such, have the faculty of the pastor. (§1)
4. Superiors of an Order: only those in their order, or residing in their order’s facilities, may have their confessions heard.

NBby canon law, only priests and bishops can be Acting Pastors or Pastors)
CIC:

Can. 969 §1. The local ordinary alone is competent to confer upon any presbyters whatsoever the faculty to hear the confessions of any of the faithful. Presbyters who are members of religious institutes, however, are not to use the faculty without at least the presumed permission of their superior.

§2. The superior of a religious institute or society of apostolic life mentioned in ⇒ can. 968, §2 is competent to confer upon any presbyters whatsoever the faculty to hear the confessions of their subjects and of others living day and night in the house.

Bishops and Religious Superiors alone grant faculties to other priests besides ordinaries, pastors, acting pastors, and religious superiors.
CIC:

Can. 970 The faculty to hear confessions is not to be granted except to presbyters who are found to be suitable through an examination or whose suitability is otherwise evident.

proof that not every priest is suitable… canon law says so!
CIC:

Can. 971 The local ordinary is not to grant the faculty of hearing confessions habitually to a presbyter, even one having a domicile or quasi-domicile in his jurisdiction, unless he has first heard the ordinary of the same presbyter insofar as possible.

No granting faculties to other Bishop’s priests unless you’ve checked with the other bishop.

Refs:
vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3F.HTM
vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3G.HTM

Bottom Line: Canon Law is clear: in the proper place, with the proper priest, unless something is very strange.

 

[Joysong]

Can. 970 The faculty to hear confessions is not to be granted except to presbyters who are found to be suitable through an examination or whose suitability is otherwise evident.

This is true of Blessed Father Solanus Casey, who was denied the faculty of hearing confessions in his Capuchin Order.

 

[Joysong]

JReducation:

That kind of pushing violates justice. If the Church gives someone a choice on something, it is against justice for us to push our particular view point as the only choice or the correct choice. Justice requires that we do [not] make ourselves into authorities over others when we do not have such authority.

I noted your omission of the word “not”, JR, but we knew what you meant. This was a very profound statement that I had not considered until you posted the necessity of justice, with all of its deep moral implications. I would like to see a thread on this some day. It is unlikely to be weighed sufficiently by some who violate it and fail to discern the reasons for doing so.

As I pondered your words this evening, I remembered another very pressing “WHY” that was used by Christ Himself to St. Paul, Acts 9:4. “Why … are you persecuting Me?”

 

[Aramis]

Food for thought:

1. 
   *]They have summer weight cassocks
   *]From the photos I have seen at my old seminary, one CAN play baseball in a cassock!

1. 
   Having seen many many photos of people playing soccer in various robes around the world, including the middle east, it’s quite plausible to play almost any land-bound sport in a cassock.

 

[dessert]

This sounds like a great deal of gossip and vicious speculation in and of itself.

For “proof” I should go by “sacristy conversations and gossip” as well as heresay from “co-workers”?

Of course priests sin. They go to confession like everyone else. Priests are subject to temptation just like the rest of us. That doesn’t deny them the right to go on vacations or wear street clothes.

Who are you, or I, (or any other lay person) to dictate how a priest should dress in public?

I don’t think priests have to go to confession. Other than there own personal prayer life. They did when in the seminary.

 

[paperwight]

Of course they go to confession.

if you want proof, I used to mind the door at a monastery, and there was a steady stream of priests from neighbouring parishes, usually on Friday mornings.

 

[Aramis]

I don’t think priests have to go to confession. Other than there own personal prayer life. They did when in the seminary.

Canon law requires them to go to confession, too. Canon 989 requires all the faithful to confess not less than once per year. In the CIC, the clerics are part of the faithful, but no longer part of the lay faithful, and the canon says faithful, not lay faithful.

It is decidedly rare these days when a priest is posted somewhere so isolated they can not go to confession. Even so, the bishop is supposed to drop in at least once a year in person, so they can/should/must avail themselves of that opportunity. The bishop himself must visit the whole of the diocese every 5 years. (CIC #396)

In any case, during the required vacation, a priest should have at least some overlap with the fill-in priest, and they can thus hear each the other’s confession. Further, most of the time, they will be going some place where there are other Catholics, and thus most likely, Catholic priests.

 

[Joysong]

Awhile ago, there was a lengthly discussion in Spirituality about the requirement of annual confession. The canon reads:

Can. 989 After having reached the age of discretion, each member of the faithful is obliged to confess faithfully his or her grave sins at least once a year.

It was determined that when there have been no ‘grave sins’ committed, the obligation to confess venial sins is not mandatory, but it is certainly a praiseworthy practice – not only once a year, but frequently.

Since the faithful DO have an obligation to receive the Eucharist once a year to remain in good standing as a Catholic [referred to sometimes as our Easter duty] it would be obvious that if grave sin is present, the penitent must first prepare by going to confession.

 

[EasterJoy]

…proof that not every priest is suitable… canon law says so!

No granting faculties to other Bishop’s priests unless you’ve checked with the other bishop.

Refs:
vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3F.HTM
vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3G.HTM

Bottom Line: Canon Law is clear: in the proper place, with the proper priest, unless something is very strange.

Also, it should be noted that chancery offices are not cavalier about granting faculties to visiting priests, especially not since the need to protect the faithful from predators has been more fully recognized. There has to be a full background check. It is not just that the diocese might get sued. It is that being less vigilant would make it much more difficult to prevent a problem priest from harming more of the faithful than he already has.

A priest on vacation may easily be somewhere that he does not have faculties. If he chooses not to wear clericals, he also does not put himself in the position of having to turn down requests from laypersons who don’t understand that priestly faculties have jurisdictional boundaries in canon law, and for good reason.

 

[lovy]

I say they should.

I were a miraclous medal , many people ask why I were it,then it’s my time to speak on the church

thier collar speaks volumes!!