www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology vestments

I would like to ask everyone why we uniates are so in love with ugly vestments and made up head gear. From what I know, the SSMI make almost all the vestment commonly seen in ukrainian churches. I also know that they are not cheap, yet they use inferior galoon and cheap roman-looking fabric. Another problem seems to be their patterns which usually means that the phelonion only comes down to the priests knees (maybe they are trying to save on fabric). For the same price if not less, you could most likely find a seamstress or tailor to sew a proper set of vestments.
I also find it unbecominig when an eastern right priest wears a suit a collar, what ever happened to a poriasnik and ryassa worn with a cross (and a skufia or kamilavka)? I know that when I see a priest in the shopping mall wearing a cassock and cross that I can stop and ask for a blessing. This happens to me all the time.
Priests in my eparchy are pretty good about this, I can't remember the last time i saw one of those silly kolpaks. How is the situation in the rest of the uniate world?

ilya

[ 03-21-2002: Message edited by: ilya goes to church ]

[ 03-21-2002: Message edited by: ilya goes to church ]

Dear Ilya,

I sympathise with you on the matter of poor vestments...I don't like tasteless vestments either.

And I don't mean to knock this off topic, but the above quote struck me. Why would you find it hard to respect a priest who chooses to wear a clerical suit at times or all the time rather than a cassock and pectoral cross? I understand that the latter is preferable, and I even prefer it to the suit, but why have trouble respecting a priest over what he wears? Suit or cassock, a priest is a priest.

Just wondering...

you are absolutely right, my mistake i will correct. after all, i am just a ignorant teenager

forgive me a sinner,
Ilya

[ 03-21-2002: Message edited by: ilya goes to church ]

God forgives.

Forgive me as well. I hope I didn't come across as rude or anything...I just feel like priests always get a bad rap, we could cut them a little slack, esp. with little things.

Ilya,
Our paster usually wheres a black shirt with no white collar and usually ralph lauren pants. He only uses his robe and rason if the bishop is ib town or we have an event with the local ukie Orthodox. In the pastoral guide for Ukrainian Catholics in the U.S., it says the headress is to be the Kolpak from the L'viv province. Ilike the cylinder(sic?) ones better but my priest says its Russian, same with the high back vestments. Thats all from the Californian Uniate world.

-ukrainiancatholic

Excuse this poor Greek for asking, but what the heck is a kolpak? Is it perhaps a variation of 'klobuk'?

For the record, the bishops council in the U.S. mandates that in public (i.e., outside of the church and its grounds), a priest is to wear pants and clerical shirt, with or without a coat. The old rule also required a hat (Cardinal Spellman of New York was a stickler about this) but that has since been rescinded. The idea was that an adult man wearing a "dress" instead of pants would subject the church to ridicule from the non-liturgical Christians and the unchurched.

I agree that a member of the clergy should be identifiable as such; the Anglican invention of the "Roman collar" seems to serve this purpose, although I understand that in at least one Ruthenian diocese, our deacons are forbidden to wear this in public lest folks confuse them with priests. Riasson in church; slacks and tie elsewhere. Oy vey. Perhaps we should go back to the Friar Tuck look with the whole top of the head tonsure. Certainly distinctive. (Although many of us would not be able to do so since the top is 'already gone'.

Such a puzzlement!!!

Blessings!

Just a short note on the phelonion (=chasuble for the RCs).

The original Byzantine phelonion was bell-shaped and was fitted to the priest's shoulders. The Russians developed the high-back phelon with the storage space behind the neck. Some Balkan usages cut the front space so that the priest could use his hands freely. Elsewhere, the front fell almost as long as the back, and the priest had to ruffle it up over the forearms when the hands were needed. (In practical terms, it causes problems when using the kadilo/livanisterion.) There is no reason for the Ukrainians to use the high-back; it's not Ukrainian. And this usage conforms with the rest of the Constantinopolitan world.

As for ugly patterns and colors: that's where pani's come in. (And the babas too.)

Just a fashion note, not from Martha Stewart!!!

Blessings!

The kolpak is a late uniate invention used instead of the traditional kamilavkion (cylindrical hat) which is used in great ukraine, russia and greece. Just like the one piece omophorion, it is another typical blunder that we can do without. I don't know too much about the above, but Protodeacon David would be able to help you if you have any further questions.

RETURN TO TRADITION
the sooner we look and pray like the orthodox, the sooner we will be in communion with them.

Also Ephrem,
My father (who wears all the proper priestly attire [and never a suit][and high-backs too]) is a Mitrophoric Archpriest and that is why sometimes I type faster than I can think on that subject. Priest do deserve our utmost respect, their job is not easy.

Ilya

[ 03-21-2002: Message edited by: ilya goes to church ]

Oh John,

If only Roman Priests still wore cassocks and birrettas, they would look so much more distinguished and proper. Second, if it were socially acceptable for men to wear dresses I don't think I would ever wear pants again. If a priest can, why not?

i write too much for my own good.

ilya the sinner

A NOTE ON HIGH BACKS

In our church we have begun to use high-backs. Although they are a pan-slavic baroque variation they serve three good purposes.
1. For services like vespers and Matins, the priest removes his phelonion several times. High-backs are much easier to put on and take off rather than greek style phelonions with clasps and buttons (and sometimes zippers [why?, i don't know])
2. They allow for air circulation. Many priests sweat a lot during liturgical services and this causes greek style phelonions tend to be irritating and to wear out much faster around the neck (unless they have that wonderful greek catholic lace trim, hehehe). They keep you warm in the winter (especially in a drafty church like ours), and cool in the summer (like air conditioned vestments).
3. They provide the priest with anonymity. The priest should not be drawing attention to himself. When he faces the east it could be anybody behind that phelonion. It is surprisingly beautiful.

The fourth unofficial reason is that they look really good, especially if your priest has a beard.
Also, there are precidents for western ukrainians to wear high-backs.
My prediction, high-backs will eventually catch on and our parish with its 14 sets which are out of this world, will have been on the forefront.

LONG LIVE HIGH-BACKS!

ilya

Yes, St. Elias Parish is always the vanguard of "style" in the Uniate Church. However, as I have mentioned before, I have seen pictures of the Pastor and other clergy of the parish in suits and collars.

Ilya is correct about the kolpak. If I am not mistaken, it was invented at the Lviv Synod or Sobor of 1890 (or the one closest to that date). It was designed so that our priests would not look too Orthodox.

High-backs are nice, but I don't see a need for our Church to switch to them. If there was something theologically wrong with Greek style vestments, then sure, but this is just a matter of style. With respect to phelons I say do what you want. But don't force it upon other people.

Daniil

Spot on as usual danch.
coming to pre-sanc tommorrow?

When I was ordained 9 years ago, I ased the SSMI to make my vestments. I am 6'5" - the back of the phelonion came to the top of the back of my knees. I asked why it was so short and was told that they only had three patterns - small, medium, and large (I had received the large). I have since had an Orthodox woman in Winnipeg make my vestments. She had a lot of trouble trying to get the Greek-style collar. Although I have worn and like the high-back, to wear one out here in the West is certain "ex-communication."

The wearing of cassock and riasa is not a common thing out here - you will get ridiculed unless of course, you have a bushy beard, and wear the skufia as well (like me )- then they can't tell if you are Orthodox or Catholic.

When asked, I always respond - yes!

What does the kolpak look like?

Vicki

It looks like a Polish Cantor's hat from the Jewish synagogue tradition. Except that the cantor's hat was white, and the kolpak is black.

Just a note:

I think that now that we are in the 21st century, Roman priests could easily go out in the street in a "dress" and not be ridiculed--after all, with transvestites, Hare Krishnas, etc., who would care?

I think it's nice when our priests wear the cassock and rasson. But I'm not going to harp on them if they wear that business suit thing. Although I would say it doesn't look (to me) as dignified as the traditional cassock and rasson, especially when it is crisp and neatly ironed, and I love the Greek cut with the long sleeves....ooooooo ordain me a deacon/priest quick! ;-)

In Christ,

anastasios

Let's not forget that priestly vestments did not originate in the priestly attire of the Old Testament but developed from the secular dress of the Graeco-Roman world. In the earliest times the liturgical was merely the then equivalent of what we today would call our "Sunday best". Liturgical insignia as we know it only began to develop in the third century and, for us Byzantines, it was really only finalized in the twelfth century. Given this, it only makes sense that the street attire for today's clergy be practical as well as symbolic. I have no objection to those who choose to wear the rason and the pectoral cross. I also have no objection to clergy who choose to wear the "business suit" with the Roman collar (Metropolitan Philip of the Antiochian Church wears one). I would even welcome a new type of attire for clergy to wear when on official business away from the parish grounds.

Just a few comments in defense of 21st. century priests and also our customs.

Whatever the reasons for the introduction of the kolpak were, it does, as has been mentioned have historical roots in Jewish observance. Yes, it was used by cantors in the synagogue and perhaps by other officials of the temple. Just look at some of the Easter-time, "Life of Christ" movies and the high priests and temple clergy are often shown in a hat that looks oh so similar to our kolpak.

I personally love the kolpak and wear it when appropriate. They can be black or trimmed with red or purple (or even completely red) for bishops and priest of rank. They come hard or collapsible. I don't see too much difference between our kolpak and the Russian scufia, which is simply four sided instead of eight. Additionally, what is so different from this and the other types of kamilavka? A few added sides? It is still round.

Clerical headdress differs from culture to culture. The Greek kamilavka differs from the Russian, as do the scufias or soft-hats. So, why is it not appropriate for we Ruthenians and Ukrainians, who follow our own recension, to have a hat that is particularly "ours" and distinguishes our tradition. The kolpak was not simply invented. It has a history and was adopted by our clergy for a reason. I don't think it looks at all like a Roman biretta and does serve the same function as do differing styles of hats in other cultures. Once again, we should feel no shame or inferiority when it comes to our customs and styles.

The same goes for the use of our vestments. It was never the common practice to use high back, Russian style vestments in churches of the Ruthenian recension and personally, I do not care to ever see them be initiated. As for the length of certain vestments, yes, it was the practice in former times to make them shorter, most likely in imitation of the Roman chasuble, (which also went through a "down" period of design, ie: the stiff, Romanesque "fiddle-back" style, which has more or less been abandoned and recognized as a product of poor taste) but now anyway, most of our priests have gone to wearing vestments of proper length. Even our good Sisters in Uniontown will make the vestments to whatever specifications you like. (At one time, they were more particular about how long they produced them.) I have just received two very nice sets from them and they are plenty long for me, reaching to my calves.

I don't think that we should confuse our practice with the Greek style of phelonion and epitrachilion, which often reach completely to the floor. The Greeks are used to this, but to tell you the truth, try wearing a set like this and if you are not used to it, you will trip all over the altar. They have the flair for it. But, that is theirs and we have ours. To me, the proper length for our vestments is more or less to the calf or mid-lower leg (between the knee and the ankle). By the way, any high back Russian vestments I have ever seen have always been rather short, with the phelon reaching only around the knee. Likewise, Russian phelonions tend to be very short in the front. Just a difference of style, but I would not call them long.

One other peculiarity should be mentioned. The small veils for the chalice and diskos today are standardly both hard-squared objects with flaps, but occasionally you will see a Ruthenian set that has a soft-flat square veil, without flaps, for the diskos. I believe this to be a more original form of the diskos veil, probably before the other, hard veils appeared. Another example of antiquity in our sometimes mistaken-for-Latin practices.

While we are on the subject of vestments: I find it interesting that in our recension, the proper practice during the creed is for the priest to wave the aer in front of his face, vertically, gazing into it. Other recensions flap the aer horizontally, in upward motions. This latter practice is probably more to the origin of the action, which was not stylized as it is today, but was merely the act of the deacons removing the veils from the sacred vessels, which, in Hagia Sophia were very large and it sometimes took several deacons and several tries, to remove the veil. Thus, the waving motion today, after which priests in other traditions, wave it around, now symbolizing the action of the Holy Spirit, but originally used to chase away flies.

Our Ruthenian practice of waving the aer has also become spiritualized, as the priest gazes into the same veil that will cover his face in death, but now from the outside of the veil - in and later, from the inside, looking out. On earth, the mysteries of the faith (expressed in the creed) are hidden from us, but in death, all shall be revealed. Thus, the practice of covering the priest's face with the vozdukh (aer) at his funeral. In the old "L'viv Sluzhebnyk", the rubrics stated that the priest, at the conclusion of the creed, makes three times vertically, the sign of the cross with the unfolded (open) vozdukh (aer), reciting the trisagion (Svyatij Bozhe . . . Holy God . . . ). This was meant to remind the priest of his own funeral, when the aer would be covering his face and the funeral anthem, "Holy God . . . " would be sung. A beautiful custom that has since been removed from our books, but which I keep, in honor of all of our Ruthenian priests that have inspired me and used this practice and also, in somber recollection that one day, we will all pass from this life. Pure or not, I think this is a symbolic gesture worth preserving among our customs.

I thank those here who have some empathy for us priests. The collar and suit have become standard here in the US and most of us do not feel the necessity of wearing the cassock around the street, unless there is some specific liturgical purpose for this, or when on a pastoral call such as house blessings, formal dinners, convocations, etc. It's just more comfortable and practical for most of us. If some want to wear the cassock in the street, so be it, but I do think that it is a more common witness and one that is more appealing to most Americans, to wear the clerical street dress which is pants and a collar shirt with perhaps a suit coat. As Moose rightly pointed out, most all of our garb today was at one time, accepted street dress. And don't forget, in Greece even, priests are calling for a change to this more contemporary clerical attire and to abandon the necessity of wearing robes constantly in the street. Change is not always threatening or negative.

I think that vestments can be beautiful both when made with expensive brocade or a plainer material, as long as it is embellished with an attractive galloon and proper crosses/emblems. To tell you the truth, I used to love the most heavy and elaborate brocades and still find them beautiful, but simplicity also makes a statement and I have several sets that are of a plain material but have been told that they look fabulous with the choice of galloon and crosses. These bring out the base material and certainly make a statement of color for whatever season they are for. Some brocades are very heavy and do cause one to perspire a lot. Lighter weight material is a help, especially in the summer. The only thing that I would really put a stop to is those modern Roman style emblems that I have seen some sets of recent vestments use. These are hideous and not appropriate for our Rite. Whoever had the idea (I think it was Gaspard Co.) to use these on Byzantine vestments has the concept all wrong. But, again, simpler material with tasteful decoration can be appealing.

That's about all for my lecture on vestments and attire. Sorry to be so long winded but it is a matter of interest and personal relevance to me. God bless you all during the upcoming holydays and/or during the rest of Great Lent.

Fr. Joe

Fr.,
If you want the kolpak, you can have it.
Personally in conjures up images of old (beardless) priests serving liturgy in a church with no iconostas, large alter, statues and all the rest of that bad uniate stuff. The one and only reason for the kolpak is so that our priests don't look russian. So fine, look jewish. Just not in my church. I sometimes forget that I am blessed to be in an eparchy where the number of priests that wear kolpaks is 0.
I absolutely agree with you on simple vestments. My favourite vestment that I have seen are plain white material with a blue ribbon trim and simple blue ribbon crosses.

Also, Daniil,

The ONLY time my father wears a suit instead of his riassa is when he goes out dancing with my mother. It is probably a wise idea for obvious reasons.

The more we have in common with the Orthodox, the sooner we will be able to share the Holy Mysteries.
The more we differ from the Orthodox, the farther appart we get.

ilya, a hell deserving sinner

[ 03-22-2002: Message edited by: ilya goes to church ]

My understanding is that it has always been the custom in the United States for Catholic priests to only wear the cassock on Catholic grounds (in the rectory, on the church property, etc.).

I also understand that both here and in Europe the Catholic customs was for priests who are university professors not to wear the cassock (the principle being that the cassock was originally the same clothing item as the academic gown; priests serving within the Academy evolved with the rest of their community).

I take it a modern movement is seeing wider use of the cassock?

Axios

I have never heard of wearing a cassock only on church grounds, does a soldier only wear a uniform at the base? Of course not. It is a visible sign of his position in the world. One could use a suit for this but again, cassock or riassa looks much nicer. Kolpaks still look plain silly.

Remember I am only 19, I think that I speak for a young persons when I say that we want something REAL and rooted in tradition, not huggy touchy feely nonsence. This just makes us loose more respect for Holy Mother Church. I have seen it happen all too often in school.

ilya

Sorry, luv, but the rule about cassock on Church grounds only has been around for about a 100 years. Otherwise, it's business attire with clerical shirt/collar. (Bishops' Council mandate.)

As a young seminarian (of the Greek persuasion) I always wore the cassock while teaching or doing churchy stuff. When going to the store to purchase new underwear and socks (etc.), I wore slacks, the black shirt with plastic collar insert, and whatever kept me warm. Same with any other travel. Going home to visit my mom and family, I wore slacks and a modest shirt. The key thing for me is: wear what is appropriate for the task you are performing.

Once, I had a doctor's appointment and I showed up in my German class wearing slacks and a clerical shirt (I normally wore only the cassock in class and elsewhere, including extracurricular activities.) One puppy in the back spoke out in a stage whisper: "Shit! He's got legs!!!!" The class dissolved in laughter, and I, appropriately, then announced a unscheduled quiz. [Hey, they loved me and I loved them.]

It isn't necessarily the attire; it's the love and concern that we as Christians show to each other -- including the young folks.

Blessings!

Dr. John,

I note Ilya is from Canada, and since these practices do differ from country to contry, maybe Canada is different.

I do note however, that occassionally you find Catholics who insist on the observance of what they think is a "tradition", but is not. Sometimes the case is very recent practices that are incorrectly assumed to be historic (i.e.. the use of the title "Father" for secular priests* in the English speaking world), or a surprising number of practices that Christian faithful assume are traditions, but they actually know more from the movies than church life!

I go back to my previous post. Because the cassock and the academic gown were originally the same garment, priestly university professors evolved with the Academy. In very recent years they have picked up the habit (no pun intended) of wearing the clerical suit, but this is clearly an innovation. Nevertheless, I remember reading a comment in NCRegister once, critical of a University professor/priest, noting a photo of him in a business suit and necktie, saying how his garb "proves" he is a dissent and rejects tradition!

Axios

* This custom in the English speaking world was introduced by Cardinal Manning, Archbishop of Westminister. However, the academic title "Doctor", for those who possessed it, was long considered superior to "Father" and even "Msgr." Modern innovation has changed this.

In Ukraine and all other Eastern Christian countries, priests are addressed as "Father." If they were previously not in the English speaking world, I would surmise that this was because Orthodox or Greek Catholics did not exist in those places until later. Obviously, even Roman Catholics are a rather new phenomenon in many English speaking places. I am not forgetting that they existed in England for much longer, but because they were a minority, could it be that they wished to imitate the usage of the Church of England.

Ironically, it was common for Orthodox in the English speaking world to copy Anglican terminology at first, in order to adopt a system different from Catholics. Sometimes they still do, as in "Right Reverend" for a regular bishop. But, I don't think that they ever did not use "Father" to refer to priests. Actually, "reverend" is probably an English innovation, more than the term "Father." Does anyone know where "reverend" was first used? Axios?

Today, in Ukrainian speaking communities, "reverend" is translated as "preosvyashchenishy" or literally, "most holy" or "most sanctified" thus an equivalent to what we would say as "reverend." This is also true in the Church Slavonic redaction of the liturgy.

While we say "the Reverend _________" (or Very Rev. or Rt. Rev. or Most Rev.) in print and as a form of introduction, and this has become standard English usage, it is never proper to call a priest "Reverend _______" as a personal form of address.

If Cardinal Manning introduced the title "Father" to the English speaking world, it must have been to continue the form as used in other languages of the Catholic and Orthodox worlds. I do not know what Roman priests are called in Latin. Is it "Pater"? Obviously in Spanish speaking places, they are known as "Padre." I don't know when Monsignor would have been used in England, outside of the Catholic Church. But, yes, the name of "doctor" was and still is a coveted title.

It is interesting that in Ukraine and Subcarpathian Rus', (probably following the custom of Latin Rite clergy) our priests that held advanced theological degrees (STD, JCD, SEOD, etc) were often addressed as "the Reverend Doctor _________" or even something such as, for example: "the Revered Msgr. Doctor Basil Shereghy" or "the Very Reverend Canon Doctor Julius Marina" etc. "Canon" would often replace "Father" as does "Msgr."

The idea of "canons" and "cathedral chapters" is an influence of the Latin Rite on our ecclesiastical organization, but it has become an accepted practice in many Greek Catholic eparchies. Their original purpose, that of celebrating all of the "canonical hours" in cathedral churches, is quite relevant to our church, since cathedrals should always keep a complete liturgical schedule. Chapters of canons have even been established here in the US, in the Ukrainian Catholic Church, but I doubt that many are occupied with the celebration of the office.

Doctor John, I agree with you wholeheartedly, that "It isn't necessarily the attire; it's the love and concern that we as Christians show to each other -- including the young folks." If we are to evolve with the times to some degree, then cassocks in the street are just not the common thing. I concur with you that the proper attire is that best suited and appropriate to the task one is performing. Well said indeed.

Fr. Joe

As far as clerical titles go, it used to be that in French (and English, I think), diocesan priests were called Mr. So-and-so, and religious priests were called Fr. So-and-so. Eventually, Father was adopted for all priests. That's what I heard, anyway. Perhaps it was that way in Europe. I think that's how we get Don Bosco (diocesan, at least at first...if I'm not mistaken, "Don" is like "Mister") and Padre Pio (Capuchin friar).

Mor Ephrem:

That is an interesting point. Perhaps you are on to something. On the other hand, professed "choir nuns" were called "Dame" and maybe still are in some places. There's never an easy solution to these things.

Don Bosco, founder of the Salesian Order is an interesting saint, but I admit not knowing much about him.

God bless you during this first Holy Week.

Fr. Joe

Dear in Christ,

I would just like to point out so it is absolutely clear that not all of us "cassock/riassa all the time" crowd do it because of some sort of anal sticking to tradition (sorry for reference to anatomy).

I understand the concept that clerical dress evolved over time. I do not object to priests wearing the business suit thing. My objection is that it looks stupid (to me). I think we Byzantines developed a professional, unique form of clerical dress (the riassa) and that we should stick to that instead of copying the Anglicans and their business suits. But I'm not sitting around whining and complaining about "the tradition." So please no one get on my case for liking riassa all the time. I certainly wouldn't ever complain to a priest about it (unless he were my friend and I suggested he really look stylish by purchasing a nice crisp riassa!)

As for those who claim that riassas are not comfortable: yeah right! I put one on once for Holloween (I was going as a Saint). What a comfrotable piece of clothing! That piece of art relegated to the church for a tight, neck-crunching collar???!!!

In Christ,

"Riassa-loving" anastasios

Really Splendid Vestments:

www.kwvestments.com [kwvestments.com]

Quite reasonable in cost as well.

Michael

Please don't tell me that you used a priest's/deacon's riason to attend a Halloween party. You didn't, did you?

Blessings

I went to a Catholic alternative to a halloween party where everyone went as a Saint. I went as a certain bishop-saint, with a used riassa I came across. Why, is that sinful? I hope I didn't offend you. People in movies donn clerical grab to portray Bishops/saints, etc. Why can't I? The point was to honor the Saint you went as, not to revel in some stupidity like the proverbial "pregnant nun" outfit.

In Christ,

anastasios

A riassa made out of uncomfortable fabric will be uncomfortable. I've seen some polyester doubleknit horrors that would be about as comfortable as a Hefty bag.

Contrariwise, a riassa made of a breathable, garment weight fabric can be quite comfortable, and it covers a multitude of sins, too, LOL!


Behind on my stitching as usual,


Sharon


Sharon Mech, SFO
Cantor & sinner
sharon@cmhc.com

Well, when I was 'coming up' in seminary (Latin mainly, but enough Easterns to make the Goths nervous), we were trained that the cassock/riason was a 'consecrated garment', we made the sign of the cross over it when we put it on, we recited a special prayer "indue me, o bone Jesu, per hanc vestem novum hominem quem requiret sancta vocatio mea,....." (=grant in me o good Jesus, through this garb, the new man which my holy vocation requires....). While it was our daily garb, we were taught to treat it with respect. Old cassocks/riasas were not simply discarded, but were burned (or given to novices) when they were beyond wear.

Maybe I'm nuts, but this is what I was taught, and this was the absolute practice, not just for Jesuits, but also for my Dominican, Carmelite and Franciscan classmates. Halloween? No way.

PS: I remember the nuns doing the "saints costumes" thing when I was a little kid. But in those days, there were no "evil" images (like executioners, Darth Vaders, etc.) just ghosts, pirates, soldiers and sailors, the ever popular cowboys, and princesses and ballerinas and cowgirls (with the occasional witch) for the girls. Some of the new Halloween costumes and images are too gruesome and 'dark-side' for a holiday that was originally a celebration of the Saints. But a 'procession of saints-look-alikes' seems to me to be a bit hokey.

And once again, Sister Sharon hits the nail on the head. Most religious-order garb was made of wool serge material. It lasted for ages (although the tushie oftentimes got shiny if one was a classroom teacher). It was quite warm in winter, and was respectable enough for spring and fall. In summer, if one was in a 'liberal' house, one could obtain a 'bengaline silk' cassock which was much more lightweight. But the 'silk' (artificial fabric) would rustle when one was walking, and this made it difficult to sneak up upon student malefactors undetected.

As for the "tight collar", the old rabats used starched cotton; later that was transformed into celluloid, which could indeed make "hangman's" marks around the neck. The solution: get one a half size bigger. The most recent development, the black drip-dry shirt with the tab insert, is very comfortable. And when appropriate, the tab could come out, the button undone, and one had the 'sport-shirt' feeling, while still remaining clerically attired and presentable.

Among the Orthodox, there was no 'celluloid' collar. The inner-riason just buttoned around the neck and there was a string-belt to keep the garb fastened. The Exo-riason (the so called "angel wing") was originally a raincoat made of tightly woven fabric that could be 'water-resistant' (yeah, right), but the tight weave did serve as a type of pre-Eddie Bauer windbreaker. The same with the veil on the kamelavkion. The two front strips were originally tied together to protect the kamelavkion and to serve as a scarf against cold winds.

Just a bit of history.

Blessings!

Oooops! Neglected to mention the title thing.

In Germany, Austria and Switzerland, the current practice is to address a diocesan priest as "Herr Pfarrer", literally Mr. Pastor. (Perhaps a post-Lutheran influence).

Religious order clergy are known as "Frater" (=brother) for the non-ordained, and "Pater" (=father) for the ordained.

In Catholic areas, the priest would oftentimes be seen in the "talar" (=cassock) when around the church or the grounds (or bringing the Eucharist to the shut ins). But off the grounds, it was/is black (or grey suit), white shirt and black tie. The older Jesuit brothers in these lands oftentimes wore a black/grey suit with an ordinary white pointy-collar shirt, but with a black 'rabat' covering the chest, but with the collar points over it. Churchy, but not weird. (AND, not expensive. For religious order folks, the KEY criterion: "modesty in all things".)

Blessings, y'all!

Dr. John,

I can undestand your desire to respect the garments. Rules are good, but we were at a good celebration of All Hallow's Eve (no gruesome characters, etc), and the community was representing its faith in the Gospelites of the past. So while the purists might object to my having worn an old riassa to portray that wonderful saint, the faithful at that party were impressed at the length to which I went to get those materials. In the end, Christ was glorified, and a lot of children were kept away from monsters, demons, and pregnant nun costumes!

In Christ,

anastasios

I can see your perspective. But, for me (and for many 'old school' folks) the use of a consecrated garment outside of a liturgical function is just not in the cards. The garb parallels the 'sacramental' perspective that we apply to holy water, palms, etc. We Easterns don't have a whole mess of "blessings" and "consecrations" for objects; for us, an object is sanctified by its use. And we don't use it outside of its intended religious use, no matter the intention. Guess I'm just an old fuddy-duddy.

Blessings!

Speaking of vestments, I have had good luck with Nikita Borisov of near Johnson City, New York, who made several podryasniki and a wide-sleeved riasa for me which fit well. I also recommend Yaroslava Trentchev of Brampton, Ontario who made me a very nice winter-weight wool podryasnik.
the subdeacon Randolph, a sinner

Geez Dr. John, you are such a traditionalist! ;-)

anastasios

If you want to be super trendy (Yes, that's super trendy), then get yourselves a denim riassa. My uncle had one and then gave it my father when he realized it was odd. Also, for winter there is something called a "riassa palto" -- basically a really haeavy riassa. Definately a must have for priests in northern or cold areas.

Daniil