What are your thoughts about expensive and/or ostentatious vestments?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Draper
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
eightydeuce82 said:
Actually friend what you are talking about is a dalmatic (what priests and deacons wear as the outer garment today) and those didn’t come around till the 4th century!
Click to expand...
No I’m not, although it would depend on the cut of a specific tunic (ordinary, daily wear garb) for an individual cleric of the early church as to whether it would be a chasuble or dalmatic.

So you know, the “outer garment” a priest wears when celebrating the Mass is a chasuble. The Pope and some ordinaries used to wear dalmatics under their chasubles, but that’s not very common today.
 
Draper said:
What are your thoughts about expensive and/or ostentatious vestments? For years I really appreciated seeing ornate vestments now and then (which was fairly rare.) Vestments made of fancy silk damask, impressive galloons, that sort of thing. I never did like “designer vestments”, or expensive vestments that were designed in a feeble attempt to look simple/humble.

I also never cared for vestments that had abstract objects embroidered/printed on them – like stalks of wheat or what appears to be a glasses of wine.

I never really understood some priests’ desires to wear very plain and simple (and not artificially humble) vestments. I now understand their desire with the coming of Pope Francis I. What are your thoughts?
Click to expand...
If the vestments were created and made by humble sisters in a monastery somewhere or something of that nature, I think that their craftsmanship should be honored and paid for.

Many are works of art and art is an important part of Catholic thought and tradition.
 
twf said:
In the Eastern Churches, Catholic or Orthodox, very elaborate and beautiful vestments are the norm and no one questions their tradition… this only seems to be an issue for the post-Vatican II Latin Church. Pope Emeritus Benedict wore very beautiful, traditional vestments. Sadly, many Churchmen who choose to wear more elaborate vestments are often ridiculed in the media…one prominent Cardinal comes to mind in particular. What opponents fail to realize is that these vestments are not for the glorification of the individual priest, but rather they give glory to God. The priest does represent Christ the suffering servant who “humbled Himself” and there is a time for that (when he is out in the world ministering to his people), but in the context of the Church’s sacred liturgy, the priest also represents Christ the King in all His glory. We are a sacramental Church rooted in the Incarnation. We believe that matter can be sanctified for divine worship. Beautiful vestments better reflect the mysteries we celebrate - the dignity and majesty of the heavenly liturgy made present on our altars at every holy mass. It should be noted that in the Old Testament, God commanded that the ancient Israelite High Priests wear rich, elaborate vestments.
Click to expand...
Not in all such parishes. MANY Eastern parishes employ extremely humble vestments, particularly if they are of a monastic origin.

The belief that I simply won’t accept is that simple, humble and frugal vestments cannot also be beautiful and give glory to God. Some here seem to be offering that belief as if it’s a proven conclusion and it’s not.

Beauty is not limited to that which is expensive, ostentatious and/or difficult to maintain.
 
Draper said:
No I’m not, although it would depend on the cut of a specific tunic (ordinary, daily wear garb) for an individual cleric of the early church as to whether it would be a chasuble or dalmatic.

So you know, the “outer garment” a priest wears when celebrating the Mass is a chasuble. The Pope and some ordinaries used to wear dalmatics under their chasubles, but that’s not very common today.
Click to expand...
That’s correct my mistake I got my cut and past wrong! that’s what I get. But you are still off on the early church garments. What was worn and what was not. The apostles themselves wore vestments of dignity. There is literally no literature or mosaics that show the early priests wearing simple clothing. I am willing to bet you can only get back to the 4th century.
 
Draper said:
Not in all such parishes.

The belief that I simply won’t accept is that simple, humble and frugal vestments cannot also be beautiful and give glory to God. Some here seem to be offering that belief as if it’s a proven conclusion and it’s not.

Beauty is not limited to that which is expensive, ostentatious and/or difficult to maintain.
Click to expand...
This has nothing to do with expensive or not it has to do with obedience to God.
 
Draper said:
How do ostentatious vestments “glorify” God? Simply because they are expensive? I would suggest that plain, frugal and simple vestments can also be extremely beautiful.

In the case of the ointment, I suspect there wasn’t a lower cost option that was just as good if not better, so the comparison really doesn’t hold.
Click to expand...
I don’t see fine embroidery and artwork on vestments as being ostentatious.

It is easy to see that some of us disagree, and that is fine, as long as we focus on the great gift of the Mass and Holy Eucharist.
 
Dorothy said:
I don’t see fine embroidery and artwork on vestments as being ostentatious.

It is easy to see that some of us disagree, and that is fine, as long as we focus on the great gift of the Mass and Holy Eucharist.
Click to expand...
What this guy calls expensive vestments with adornment the early church called clothing!
 
eightydeuce82 said:
See above that’s where you are wrong they were always very ornate and specific see above
Click to expand...
No, they were not always very ornate. That is an impossibility. At all times there have been more ornate vestments and less ornate vestments. At all times there have been communities that could afford ornate vestments and those that couldn’t.
 
BartholomewB said:
No, they were not always very ornate. That is an impossibility. At all times there have been more ornate vestments and less ornate vestments. At all times there have been communities that could afford ornate vestments and those that couldn’t.
Click to expand...
True but the vestments were ornate weather a lot or a little and. I have already stated that since as early as the 3-4th century the church had discussed it in council. Try reading some of the councils and cannons…I bet you would be surprised at what was written about dress. and very early too.
 
BartholomewB said:
No, they were not always very ornate. That is an impossibility. At all times there have been more ornate vestments and less ornate vestments. At all times there have been communities that could afford ornate vestments and those that couldn’t.
Click to expand...
Very true. The vestments of the Apostles – of the early church were largely daily wear garb of the time. In many cases, ornately vesting like a Judaic priest might well have ended in persecution for a Catholic priest of the early church era.

In the case of religious orders and societies, it’s not always a matter of what they can afford. Many wear extremely plain, simple and frugal clothes and vestments as their own offering to God.
 
Draper said:
Actually, wearing expensive and/or ostentatious vestments has absolutely nothing to do with obedience to God.
Click to expand...
The early Church chose the chasuble of the peasant instead of the toga or pallium of the free Roman citizen. However, in all iconography, from the early Christian centuries, Jesus Himself is invariably clothed in tunic or toga or pallium, never in a chasuble. Very often the saints shown in early frescoes and mosaics, as well as in medieval manuscripts are also so portrayed.

Which is why I say good luck finding anything representing what Christ the apostles or anyone in the 1st century wore as priests, deacons, and bishops. We have tradition that says they wore some pretty fancy stuff (even the apostles)

The ecclesiastical vestments of the Christian Church developed from articles of dress worn in the Roman empire; the basic forms were inspired by classical Greek attire. Christian archeology shows conclusively that ecclesiastical apparel from the first century onward consistently follows the Greco-Roman pattern and manner of wearing the tunic and the mantle. Which were ornate BTW

And on obedience……

“You must make sacred vestments for your brother Aaron to consecrate him to serve as priest to me. The following are the vestments you must make: a pouch or breastpiece, an apron, a robe, a brocaded tunic, a mitre and a girdle, and they must use gold, violet, purple, and scarlet yarn and fine linen.” (Exodus 28).

So you say that it’s not obedience to God? What do you think they did wore whatever the heck they wanted and discarded what God told them directly? Hey remember that time that guy was struck dead by God for incensing wrong!

I went back up and underlined that since that seems to be what some think makes a point 😃
 
Draper said:
Very true. The vestments of the Apostles – of the early church were largely daily wear garb of the time. In many cases, ornately vesting like a Judaic priest might well have ended in persecution for a Catholic priest of the early church era.

In the case of religious orders and societies, it’s not always a matter of what they can afford. Many wear extremely plain, simple and frugal clothes and vestments as their own offering to God.
Click to expand...
I wonder why St John is said to have worn a golden miter? Cause that’s pretty non flashy and ornate 🤷
 
Keep in mind that simple, frugal and plain vestments can be every bit as beautiful and pleasing to God (perhaps even more so) than expensive/ostentatious vestments.

Trying to sell the belief that expensive/ostentatious vestments somehow inherently give greater glory to God is simply not true.
 
Draper said:
Keep in mind that simple, frugal and plain vestments can be every bit as beautiful and pleasing to God (perhaps even more so) than expensive/ostentatious vestments.

Trying to sell the belief that expensive/ostentatious vestments somehow inherently give greater glory to God is simply not true.
Click to expand...
So now you are the arbiter of what is or is not pleasing to God?

And to my friend above with the grammar gestapo function touché
 
This thread is making me giggle.
You do realize that vestments today are generally purchased by a seminarian’s family and friends, and they have little say in the matter. There’s not one priest in my Archdiocese that wears fiddleback vestments.
Most are very fine fabrics, and very well sewn, with little ornamentation. They are beautiful.
Many church supply houses and convents who specialize in these things don’t even offer the gaudy stuff anymore. The quality of the outstanding fabrics and the elegance of a simple design can’t be beat. They are fitting for the men standing “in persona Christi.”

To assume that the fancier the better, is like saying homely people don’t go to heaven. Silliness. The objects and fabrics used for the Holy sacrifice of the Mass should be of superior quality. Beyond that…things are a matter of personal taste.
 
pianistclare said:
This thread is making me giggle.
You do realize that vestments today are generally purchased by a seminarian’s family and friends, and they have little say in the matter. There’s not one priest in my Archdiocese that wears fiddleback vestments.
Most are very fine fabrics, and very well sewn, with little ornamentation. They are beautiful.
Many church supply houses and convents who specialize in these things don’t even offer the gaudy stuff anymore. The quality of the outstanding fabrics and the elegance of a simple design can’t be beat. They are fitting for the men standing “in persona Christi.”

To assume that the fancier the better, is like saying homely people don’t go to heaven. Silliness. The objects and fabrics used for the Holy sacrifice of the Mass should be of superior quality. Beyond that…things are a matter of personal taste.
Click to expand...
Kinda goes along with that thread on dressing well for mass I posted :eek:
 
eightydeuce82 said:
Kinda goes along with that thread on dressing well for mass I posted :eek:
Click to expand...
Or your thread on masculinity in the traditional liturgy:

http://www.askaboutchurch.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/321px-Pianeta-borboni-oronero-1.jpg

Not even my wife wears that much lace 😛

I’m very fond of the monastic tradition: plain and simple churches, simple vestments for everyday use, although they do increase the degree of ornamentation with the degree of solemnity of the day. But my abbey is fortunate, they have a monk whose specialty is designing vestments, which the abbey also offers for sale to diocesan priests.

Fortunately the Church has room to accommodate all traditions without them having to split off and become Protestants 😉

So we can see for instance:

Carthusians:



Benedictines at Solesmes:

http://www.solesmes.com/images/pschola.jpg

Benedictines at Saint-Benoît-du-Lac (the abbey I’m associated with)

http://www.st-benoit-du-lac.com/horaireliturgie/concelebration.jpg

Benedictines of Clear Creek, which celebrate Mass in the Extraordinary Form (TLM)

http://www.clearcreekmonks.org/gall...2015/clear-creek-abbey-hw-Easter-2015-241.JPG

All have fairly understated vestments on ordinary liturgical days.

So count me in with the “plain and understated” crowd.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top