Post intelligent and civil comments. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the NLM
I couldn't agree more with your observations. I do still love the sumptuous embroidery and brocades of the 'fiddleback' vestment and appreciate the beauty of lace but I think there is a great elegance in the older forms of sacred vesture.
It seems to me that the classical Liturgical Movement of Gueranger and co. looked towards the restoration of such vestments, hence they still prevail in monastic houses, especially those which were the seedbed of that Liturgical Movement.
As I noted in a previous comment, the full conical vestment is seen in Germany and I was really struck by its beauty - the play of light and shadow on the folds and swags of the silk, which relied less on heavy ornamentation and more on the cut and fabric - the "noble simplicity" as envisaged by Vatican II.
I was so inspired by what I say, that I resolved then to have one made of raw white silk (and lined with blue Thai silk) for my ordination! God willing, that will happen one day!
Working within our ancient liturgical tradition and seeking a sort of liturgical ressourcement, I'm sure we can create beautiful and worthy vestments for the Sacred Liturgy.
Shawn-
Thanks for the vestment articles. I really like the style of Sts. Ignatius/Philip Neri. This is good. In God's time!
Dear Shawn,
Thank you for publishing this scholarly, unpolemical and balanced treatment of the history of sacred vestments.
The reasons why I dislike lace and "fiddlebacks" were identified in the article in a charitable way. As I have written here once before, I feel very nervous when the Traditional liturgy is equated with a re-creation of what existed before the Council, to the exclusion of (an even disdain for) more ancient traditions.
Adrian Fortescue once described fiddlebacks, bullion braid etc as "18th century bad taste", not Tradition.
Pugin's chasubles of the 19th century (a picture of one of these chasubles is shown in the article) were his attempt, in my opinion, to recapture the more ample form of chasuble without reverting to the conical shape. The Pugin dimensions were almost identical with the Borromeon chasubles (again another beautiful example shown in the article).
The "modest" suggestion about the fiddleback moving more toward the Borromeon dimensions is a very worthy one, which I hope people will seriously consider.
I refer interested readers again to Dom Roulin's classic work "Vestments and Vesture" (Newman Press, 1931).
There's a rather good painting of St Ildefonso of Toledo by El Greco, in which the saint is depicted in a sixteenth century style Spanish "fiddleback". See: http://artchive.com/artchive/E/
e...efonso.jpg.html
Shawn: This is a truly remarkable and inspiring post.
As a seminarian, I often think of the importance of the Church being the patron of local artists and artisans. When I am a priest, God-willing, I pray that I will have opportunities to commission beautiful art for the liturgy. On a personal note, I too have long had a preference for the form of the chasuble shown on St Philip and St Ignatius of Loyola.
Dear Shawn
I very good and most enjoyable.
If we look at what the Holy Father is wearing now we see a slow trend good taste. Yes the Amice in the Romam church has gone as with the Maniple, I know one Rc priest who wears them both at Mass every Sunday.
Soon all those tredy priest who throught Vatican II banned everything are almost dead themselves. We will then see a return to the full beauty of vestments and the mass to give Our Lordf the very best that we can offer.
Thank you for you work.
Patrick Walesby
Can we also delete those gastly biretta's? At least the pom pom!
I would say that lace and fiddlebacks may be appropriate if they suit the styleof church architecture loosely. It would look somewhat strange to have a full Gothic ample chasuble in a Baroque church.
Would it? I don't think so, anymore than it would be to see the slightly more ample pre-fiddleback in a full gothic church, or a gothic church decorated with stained glass whose portraiture is more classical/Victorian than medieval, or the presence of renaissance polyphony.
I'm not against working toward such a unity necessarily, though I think it isn't necessarily necessary eiher. Provided there is organicity, there is a co-relation which makes them harmonious, rather like the different voice parts (SATB) in a piece of polyphony which makes them work together.
Thus you could have a Baroquish vestment, in a liturgy with medieval vestments and renaissance music (and of course Gregorian!); or, inversely, a baroque church, with renaissance vestments and medieval Gregorian chant.
The dischord comes when there is a rupture and break -- which is also often tied with bad taste.
I for one should love to see a medieval gothic style church, decorated with Byzantine iconography. I think those would make for a wonderful mixture.
An excellent article on vesture, and I hope that it is read and meditated upon by many. My formation was in the Roman Seminary, where we hardly ever used Gothic chasubles. Being the heirs to what used to be in the Lateran Basilica, we used what was really the best of the best of Christendom's Baroque vesture. But so many today buy so-called Roman chasubles because they are pre-conciliar, but they are in just as bad taste as many of the immediately pre-conciliar Gothic chasubles: bad fabrics, bad ornamentation, bad shapes. Ditto for lace: most priests and seminarians cannot distinguish between lace which is beautiful and dignified for the divine liturgy and lace which is machine made, half-lurex, and not fit for a boudoir. I thank the Italians for giving me the tools to discern pianete e pizzi e merletti belli from what most people are trying to bring back in the name of tradition. I love the Roman style, the Baroque, and all of that, but that is just me. While I do not loathe the Gothic chasuble and apparelled amices and all of that, I think that the Pugin-dressed cleric would look just as exotic to most of our people and in most of our churches as Filippo Neri-inspired vestments. Also, where can one buy diginified vestments a la Pugin if not Watts & Company in London (tip of the biretta or wave of the capuce to them), which for all of their glory, would require most parishes to take out a second mortgage? At St Mary's we use the best of the Holy Rood vestments, but I can tell you, on the Feast of the Transfiguration on a 100 degree day in Dixie, (even with the thermostat set to freeze mode) wearing all the proper vestments in full monastic style, all I could think of was how nice a light Roman chasuble, some air-breathing lace and a jug of sweet tea would be.
I think that this unwarrented attack on the Roman ("fiddleback") chasuble is frankly unfair. The Gothic chasuble, so popular today, is part and parcel to the unfortunate developments of the last 40 years. The slash and burn job done on the Mass in 1968 was the result of a movement that had been developing during the 20th century - what Pius XII termed "archaicism". This was a belief that the older the liturgy the better. Hence the stripping of so many good prayers from the Mass AND the return to the older, fuller chasubles. Which, it might be added, Cardinal Manning wanted to ban in the late 1800's.
Good commentary, and very insightful. For a seminarian like me who is beginning to look into having a set of vestments for his first Mass made, this is good stuff. Does anyone have any links/info on where I can get some patterns for these vestments?
Sadly enough we must not impose our personal tastes upon the church. I think the gothic, neogothic, conus- and 18th-century-fiddleback styles can co-exist together in a fully Catholic, yes Roman Rite, way. I think everyone should be able to choose according to his taste in celebrating the Holy Mass of the Roman Catholic Church. One may revive, but not impose either innovative/revolting nor archaeologicalist revolutions in the vestments. For Benedictine houses the simplicity of vestments and church buildings suits their spirituality, but the sense-inspired, often unspiritual laymen are dechristianized by calvinistic soberness and lack of expressive art. They need the gold, the smells of incense, the icons, the statues, the paintings, to be taken by their senses into the supernatural. Monks are more trained in entering the supranature, we sinful laymen are not. I think the fiddleback is very nice, especially if kept sober and in the French styles. But that is my opinion, and I respect the directions of the Roman Church which forbade the cross on a chasuble (as the Mass was the only cross) and also no iconography. Instead other particular churches of England, France and Poland and the German Empire kept their own ornaments with figures upon the chasubles. But a chasuble is a chasuble, no matter whether all red and very simple or $ 10,000 gold-embroidered Italian masterpiece 40 pnds weighing gold-chasuble. To me it is the same and it should be inculturated. With the Benedictines and Carthusians the sober styles in the parishes the rich vestments with gold and ornaments.
Very good indeed (I only found it to-day, sorry). Applied to the usus antiquior and Holy Week, the idea of rediscovering our traditional heritage without recreating exactly what was just prior to Vatican II gives us... the traditional Holy Week, i.e. pre-1955. May it be given back to us. Soon.
16 Visitors Online
Commenting by HaloScan
