W
Wjdav43
Guest
Can a Catholic priest wear regular lay clothes under his priestly vestments when celebrating the Mass?
Not so.Yes, priests may wear whatever they want underneath vestments, as long as it is covered up, (as BenedictGal said). The one exception is bishops. They usually (always?) must wear a cassock beneath their alb. But beneath the cassock, they can still wear whatever they want.
Hope this helps!
He wore the dalmatic at the Masses he celebrated on his recent visit to Britain.Not so.
I don’t think the Pope wears a dalmatic any longer under the chasuble anymore either…
Not sure about that. I’ve been in sacristys when 2 different bishops vested - one of them being the cathedral sacristy - and not a cassock in sight.Yes, priests may wear whatever they want underneath vestments, as long as it is covered up, (as BenedictGal said). The one exception is bishops. They usually (always?) must wear a cassock beneath their alb. But beneath the cassock, they can still wear whatever they want.
Hope this helps!
I’ve never known our bishop to wear a cassock but he’s usually in clericals under his vestments.Not sure about that. I’ve been in sacristys when 2 different bishops vested - one of them being the cathedral sacristy - and not a cassock in sight.
Well, yes and no. The liturgical books themselves do not require a specific form of dress underneath the liturgical vestments, but canon law, on the other hand, does require secular clerics to wear what their episcopal conferences determine to be clerical dress and those priests who belong to religious institutes or societies of apostolic life to wear the dress proper to their institute. Thus, outside of cases of emergency or necessity, you could accurately say that an American secular priest is required to wear clerical blacks or a cassock underneath his vestments, a Franciscan from a strict community is required to wear his habit underneath, and a Jesuit has no obligation in this regard. In other words, it all depends upon the status of the priest, combined with any extenuating circumstances that might justify deviation from the law.Yes, priests may wear whatever they want underneath vestments, as long as it is covered up, (as BenedictGal said). The one exception is bishops. They usually (always?) must wear a cassock beneath their alb. But beneath the cassock, they can still wear whatever they want.
Hope this helps!
That’s nice to hear. I don’t believe it’s a requirement any longer however…He wore the dalmatic at the Masses he celebrated on his recent visit to Britain.
“The vestments worn by the bishop at a liturgical celebration are the same as those worn by presbyters; but, in accordance with traditional usage, it is fitting that at a solemn celebration he wear under the chasuble a dalmatic …” (Ceremonial of Bishops #56). I suppose the phraseology is vague enough to make it optional.That’s nice to hear. I don’t believe it’s a requirement any longer however…
Not exactly. The USCCB’s legislation for Clerical Dress states: “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.”canon law, on the other hand, does require secular clerics to wear what their episcopal conferences determine to be clerical dress and those priests who belong to religious institutes or societies of apostolic life to wear the dress proper to their institute. Thus, outside of cases of emergency or necessity, you could accurately say that an American secular priest is required to wear clerical blacks or a cassock underneath his vestments
I’ve never thought of this before. Now, every time I go to mass, I’m going to be wondering, “What, if anything, is he wearing under there?”Yes, priests may wear whatever they want underneath vestments, as long as it is covered up.
Touche. You’ve eliminated one category, but allow me to cling to my point: those religious institutes who still consider the habit an integral part of their religious life presumably still regulate the dress of their members even under liturgical vestments. Can you pull the rug out from under me on that one, or will it stand on its own merits?Not exactly. The USCCB’s legislation for Clerical Dress states: “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.”
The sign of one’s priesthood in a liturgy is the priest’s stole, thus how many symbols of priestly ordination really need to be worn?
More like “never”, actually. At least not these days; at least not in the USA. Once in a while you chance across a story about a US prelate celebrating a Tridentine liturgy who gets himself all gussied-up in all the episcopal finery of yesteryear: purple choir cassock (with red buttons, piping, and sleeves), purple stock, purple tassled cincture, purple hose (or even buskins), white pontifical shoes (or even embroidered pontifical sandals), lace rochet (with red sleeves and ties), purple cappa magna (with or without an ermine hood), purple skullcap and biretta…have I forgotten anything?The one exception is bishops. They usually (always?) must wear a cassock beneath their alb.
Funny story!i remember as a kid, serving mass, our priest use to wear shorts and sandles to mass under his alb. some of the old ladies were up in arms over this and he put the issue to bed one sunday and proudly asked them during his homily, what do you think Jesus wore under his robe? he would also sometimes when the weather was warm, and our church had no a/c, wear just his alb and stole for mass, he said the chasable was too warm for him,