4
4givemeasinner
Guest
Would be possible for a principally Latin rite priest to, if he wanted to, also wear an eastern catholic cassock over his cassock/roman collar?
- Status
E
edward_george
Guest
Per the Code of Canon Law:
The only possible exception I could see to this is a Latin cleric who has faculties to offer the liturgy of another ritual Church, in which case he might wear the suitable clerical attire of the other Church while in performance of his duties.
-ACEGC
I would say that means that no, a Latin cleric should wear what pertains to Latin clergy, and an Eastern cleric what pertains to Eastern clergy. The three key things at work are 1) suitable ecclesiastical garb (is Eastern clerical garb suitable for Latin clergy?); 2) norms issued by the conference of bishops (Can you imagine a case where the conference of bishops might say "It’s okay for our clergy to wear either Latin or Eastern garb?) and 3) legitimate local customs. I would say that in Latin dioceses, local custom would entail Latin clerical attire.
The only possible exception I could see to this is a Latin cleric who has faculties to offer the liturgy of another ritual Church, in which case he might wear the suitable clerical attire of the other Church while in performance of his duties.
-ACEGC
M
malphono
Guest
I’m a little confused by the “cassock over his cassock” part. Are you asking about the outer cassock (exoriasa, sometimes called simply a riasa) being worn in lieu of a surplice? (And no, an exoriasa is not an exact equivalent nor is it used exactly the same way, but it IS proper to Easter/Oriental choir dress (with the possible exception of the Syro-Malabars) in the same way that the surplice is to the Latins. It’s also worth noting that many Oriental clergy simply wear the exoriasa over their “tongue-depressor” shirt and trousers.) If that’s the case, and with the sole exception of a bi-ritual priest when serving an Eastern/Oriental liturgy, the answer is absolutely not. Sure, it’s physically possible, but it’s no way licit, and a Latin priest who did this would be in for a very unpleasant harangue from his bishop. And BTW, that works in reverse, too: an Eastern/Oriental priest who affected a surplice would be in for the same sort of dressing-down from his bishop. The same would apply to headwear.
Now, with that said, if the question is something else, please clarify.
L
Lester_S
Guest
I’ve seen a Roman rite priest sport a cassock, at a nearby parish, in Vancouver, WA.
N
Nestor_kea
Guest
I have one idea:
When Jesuits came to China, they considered it appropiate to wear robes of Buddhistic monks. This is just an example that appropriateliness can vary.
Nowadays Protestants and Catholics are by many Chinese considered to be two religions, but I really don’t know if this has also some minor reasons in vestment.
Imagine that in area with mixture of religions there are Eastern Catholics, let’s say Byzatines “established” and for some reason Western Catholics come. There are many religions and if they wore different garb, they would be considered by many people to be different religion. And so they decide to wear “catholic garb” as it is feeled by people of that place not to confuse them in this way.
And may be to show that they are just another part of the same “body” they would use different headwear or something else.
Just an idea.
On the other hand still we can see many Eastern Catholic priests to wear Roman cassock or something similar, not their “sui iuri dress”. Probably to differ from their Orthodox / Oriental counterparts or for legal or other reasons.
When Jesuits came to China, they considered it appropiate to wear robes of Buddhistic monks. This is just an example that appropriateliness can vary.
Nowadays Protestants and Catholics are by many Chinese considered to be two religions, but I really don’t know if this has also some minor reasons in vestment.
Imagine that in area with mixture of religions there are Eastern Catholics, let’s say Byzatines “established” and for some reason Western Catholics come. There are many religions and if they wore different garb, they would be considered by many people to be different religion. And so they decide to wear “catholic garb” as it is feeled by people of that place not to confuse them in this way.
And may be to show that they are just another part of the same “body” they would use different headwear or something else.
Just an idea.
On the other hand still we can see many Eastern Catholic priests to wear Roman cassock or something similar, not their “sui iuri dress”. Probably to differ from their Orthodox / Oriental counterparts or for legal or other reasons.
A
Aramis
Guest
A Roman priest should wear the Roman Cassock when in places where the cassock is customary.
A Roman priest who is granted biritual faculties should wear the cassock as dictated by the bishop in whose parish he’s serving… in a Roman one, his Roman Cassock, in the Byzantine, whichever the Bishop of that parish dictates… unless he’s been granted an Adaptation of Rite. (Which doesn’t change his ascribed church, but permits him to serve as if he had been enrolled in the new one…)
Note that a Roman biritual priest of my acquaintance was instructed by his Roman bishop to wear his byzantine cassocks at all times he wears a cassock, and to vest as a byzantine exccept when presiding at a Roman liturgy. (He’s since been laicized, so doesn’t wear either anymore.)
A Roman priest who is granted biritual faculties should wear the cassock as dictated by the bishop in whose parish he’s serving… in a Roman one, his Roman Cassock, in the Byzantine, whichever the Bishop of that parish dictates… unless he’s been granted an Adaptation of Rite. (Which doesn’t change his ascribed church, but permits him to serve as if he had been enrolled in the new one…)
Note that a Roman biritual priest of my acquaintance was instructed by his Roman bishop to wear his byzantine cassocks at all times he wears a cassock, and to vest as a byzantine exccept when presiding at a Roman liturgy. (He’s since been laicized, so doesn’t wear either anymore.)
A
Aran_Houlihan
Guest
oman priest should wear the Roman Cassock when in places where the cassock is customary.
A Roman priest who is granted biritual faculties should wear the cassock as dictated by the bishop in whose parish he’s serving… in a Roman one, his Roman Cassock, in the Byzantine, whichever the Bishop of that parish dictates… unless he’s been granted an Adaptation of Rite. (Which doesn’t change his ascribed church, but permits him to serve as if he had been enrolled in the new one…)
Note that a Roman biritual priest of my acquaintance was instructed by his Roman bishop to wear his byzantine cassocks at all times he wears a cassock, and to vest as a byzantine exccept when presiding at a Roman liturgy
A Roman priest who is granted biritual faculties should wear the cassock as dictated by the bishop in whose parish he’s serving… in a Roman one, his Roman Cassock, in the Byzantine, whichever the Bishop of that parish dictates… unless he’s been granted an Adaptation of Rite. (Which doesn’t change his ascribed church, but permits him to serve as if he had been enrolled in the new one…)
Note that a Roman biritual priest of my acquaintance was instructed by his Roman bishop to wear his byzantine cassocks at all times he wears a cassock, and to vest as a byzantine exccept when presiding at a Roman liturgy
M
malphono
Guest
B
bben15
Guest
On a normal basis, a Latin priest should wear Latin clerical clothing, even if he is bi ritual. Even if he has bi-ritual facilities, he is still a Latin priest, and should therefore, wear a Roman cassock. However, there are exceptions. While he is serving in an Eastern parish, he may wear an Eastern cassock. But, outside of his Eastern parish duties, he should wear the Roman cassock.
God Bless.
God Bless.
A
Aramis
Guest
It says the same things in slightly different wording.Isn’t this Aramis’ post from yesterday revisited?
I
Ignatius
Guest
If you reread the OP, it seems that is actually the situation the OP was asking about.
- Status