Post intelligent and civil comments. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the NLM
Priests who have used vestments like these will tell you that they are inconvenient to use. It is difficult to to keep the hands free and there is always ti risk of knocking over the chalice with the copious amounts of fabric.
Paul Waddington
The secret of wearing vestments like these is to draw the chasuble back beyond the wrists in order to avoid the hazards you mention. When you look at medieval panel paintings and monumental brasses invariably you find chasubles used in this way. The beautiful lines created by the folds remain undiminished. These vestments are preferable to the truncated Gothic chasubles currently in use and infinitely better than the so-called 'Borromean' chasuble. Some might find them cumbersome but they are not ungainly.
Paul,
As Fr. Symondson notes, how one wears such vestments is rather important.
Additionally, factors like the specific cut used (there are variations on this more ample form), and the material used will also be important.
As with any style, some vestments are better designed than others and that will not only affect their look but also their use.
What is the color?? Chartreuse? Can that be used?
Simply marvellous!
Mitchell: The vestment looks gold to me....the lining may be of any color.
Oh, the mythical "lines" and "folds" that one only seems to see in paintings and statues. In real life, not one of the so-called "conical" vestments I've seen promoted on this blog so far really lives up to what Fortescue and others find in the folds and the simplicity of such vestments.
[This is your opinion only it should be noted, and I am not sure why you speak of "so-called" for that matter. It's interesting as well you should raise Fortescue given that he wrote some very critical remarks about the baroque form of chasuble, which I assume you probably wouldn't concur with.]
And to think (!) that so many Priests find the Maniple extremely uncomfortable (and "useless") and complain about it, yet (!) they will praise and demand the conical Chasuble with all the extra amount of fabric and "folds."
[There is really no real basis for making this kind of necessary co-relation. In fact I can think of many examples to the contrary.]
Compare the first (black and white) picture with the other two pictures. There is a huge difference between them!
[Something of apples to oranges since the black and white photo is a posed photograph, so one will see differences as one would with most anything.
I think the real question here, Latinmass1983, is whether you don't like this particular chasuble and think with different materials etc. it would be fine, or if you just don't like the conical form period -- which seems more likely the case given some fairly general comments about things like "mythical folds". If the latter is the case, then just come out with it, for it changes the whole dynamic of the discussion.]
Mitchell: Color has ALWAYS been open to wide interpretation.
People need to realize this is the way to go. Pick a fine material, an excellent cut, and reasonable orphrey and that's all one needs for a balanced chasuble. So often people will use cheap fabric so they can have tacky imagages painted or sewn on.
Tradition is on the side of simplicity, and it is far more enduring. I wish Fr. Symondson would write more on this site, he's brilliant and I love his work on Comper which has changed my perspective dramatically.
"Color has ALWAYS been open to wide interpretation."
Though under the old rite rubrics, the Sacred Congregation of Rites required that gold vestments be made from actual Cloth of Gold.
"It is difficult to to keep the hands free and there is always [the] risk of knocking over the chalice with the copious amounts of fabric."
Practically, this makes the Deacon and Subdeacon all the more important!
Would it be fair to say that this cut of chasuble is more manageable when made in fabrics finer in texture than the damask used in the second and third scans. Are surviving early examples lined?
Fr. Symondson,
You have made abundantly clear what you dislike about the "Borromean chasuble" (although it seems to me that the so-called "Philip Neri" style is the real source of your displeasure, since the dimensions laid down by St Charles Borromeo require that the chasuble reach the wrists and cover the back of the alb), but I am somewhat surprised and confused by your reference to "the truncated Gothic chasubles currently in use" -- especially because the Gothic vestments designed by Pugin and Comper appear rather "truncated" (on the back, albeit not in between the wrist and shoulder) as do the "semi-Gothic" chasubles made by the workshop of Felix Granda (in between the wrist and shoulder). On the other hand, the ugly 1970s "monastic" and "Gothic" chasubles made by Slabbinck and others are actually quite ample, so, I would appreciate some clarification as to the identity of your target. Thank you.
I was ordained in a conical chasuble, which style I really love, however, it was quite a task to "negotiate."
I think Roger is correct about the fabric being either a help or a hindrance, too.
Mr. Howard:
Regardless, it does not specify the amt. of gold. I've seen old chasubles made of "cloth of gold" with VERY LITTLE gold. And you missed the point entirely.
Colors are open to shades and hues and material holds dyes differently. So it is impossible to codify precisely, nor does liturgical history show evidence of such.
I would want to be ordained in a conical chasuble. I have noticed that His Eminence Card. DiNardo of Houston wears them.
I love the traditions of the middle ages, and these were the most common form of vestments from that era.
http://www.anglicanuseconference...ers/
Dinardo.jpg
Kim D'Souza
What I had in mind when I referred to truncated Gothic chasubles were the average products sold by church furnishers all over the Western world. Whether made of artificial silk, as they were in the 1950s, with ugly braid orphreys or transformed into machine-washable crimplene with comparably ugly orphreys, they are usually characterized by a skimped lack of fabric and bad cutting. They are ubiquitous and most readers will know what I mean.
As for Pugin's and Comper's vestments. Pugin's are fairly skimped, as I know from having worn them, and it was he who invented braid orphreys, albeit good examples of flat-pattern design. He began the practice of commercial design produced to a formula by Hardman's.
Comper's early chasubles were fuller than Pugin's but less full than they became after 1904. But they are redeemed by exquisite silk-damasks, woven to his own design, subtly dyed, using vegetabe dyes, in equally exquisite colours, and, at their best, decorated with even more exquisite embroidery. They were works of art rather than commercial products. Their controlled splendour indicates Comper's profound belief in the Real Presence. Like most good designers, his work evolved and it was never produced commercially. The weak examples plagiarized by the Warham Guild are the closest that came to commercial manufacture.
It is the latter-day commercial vestments that I deplore. Their mediocrity is revealed in comparison with the excellent vestments illustrated by Shawn in this post. Not only are they beautiful in colour, materials, amplitude and cut but they are consistently good in every detail, not least in the beauty of the lining - dark blue. In the past good vestment designers took pains to make sure that the linings were suitable and complementary to the principle textile. For instance, a good red vestment would have a dark green lining of plain silk or linen and so on. With the exception of these vestments, that detail is now almost forgotten.
As for Slabbink, I find it hard to take their work, however ample, seriously. Some years ago they presented some unlined white vestments to a Jesuit liturgical conference in Rome. I said Mass in S. Ignazio a few weeks ago and was amazed to find rows of these garments hanging in the sacristy. By now they are so bedraggled, limp and creased that they look like discarded costumes from an unsuccessful film on the subject of the decline and fall of Archbishop Marini. They are thin, hang badly, are impossible to wear tidily and have a lowering effect on the celebration of Mass.
As for the 'Borromean chasuble', it is unfortunate that they are not made better in accordance with St Charles's actual directions. Nevertheless they still looked skimped and I cannot help seeing them merely as a transition from full Gothic to Latin vestments that was not meant to be permanent.
To whomever reviewed my comment:
It is very unquestionably clear that whatever I write is only *my* opinion. I never claim to speak for other people, nor would I want to.
I have read Fortescue's work on vestments and I do not agree with him, either. It is not my practice to go with what someone said (ex. Fortescue, Roulin, O'Connell, etc.) just because they have become "idols" among some liturgical circles. Sure, Fortescue's work on the Rubrics was very good, but that does not mean that his ideas on vestments will have to be accepted without questions or doubts.
I say "mythical" because the folds are the most common thing people mention when talking about conical vestments. However, in real life, when such vestments are made (at least now), these folds are nowhere to be seen, at least not as graceful ones as the ones seen in statues or paintings, which are the ones that make some people go into ecstasy over such type of vestments.
Re the pictures, I was not referring to the color. In fact, I think that the white and black picture looks BETTER than the color ones because the actual vestment looks better and less uncomfortable... and for that matter, it seems to be better in general.
The reason why I mentioned the Maniple was because many Priests on this blog (including Fr. Peter) have complained about the use of the Maniple and have referred to it as only a "sweat band." They say that it is uncomfortable and it gets in the way during the Consecration and the Elevation(s), etc. I would assume that the conical vestments would be much more umconfortable for things such as the Consecration and Elevations, incensations, etc. Can you be so kind as to give me some exmaples of what you mean?
My personal preference is not the point of discussion here.
I'm sure I've said here before that I do not like gothic and conical Chasubles. However, that is not because they are not baroque, but because they are usually very badly made and people exaggerate on how they make them. I seem to remember that a while ago someone posted a picture of a beautiful gothic Chasuble during a ceremony somewhere in Spain (?) and I said so because it was a really beautiful gothic Chasuble. In fact, the founder of the blog even made it his point to make the comment that that was the first time that he and I agreed on something.
I'm afraid I've neevr been able to find conical vestments aesthetically pleasing. They always seem too, I don't know, bulky and awkward looking, and lack the grace of the Russian, Greek and truncated Roman styles. BUT, that's only my opinion. As long as it's in line with tradition and honoring our Lord.
I don't mean to be too picky, but the vestments were not "a gift" from the CRNJ to St. Michael's Abbey; they were purchased from Dom Daniel by the parents of one priest back in 2000.
For those interested, Google Slabbink, watch the video and judge their work for yourselves. It is interesting to see that they are trying to come to terms with recent liturgical developments but, I fear, with an unsure hand.
Thank you Fr. Symondson for your informed observations regarding the vestments illustrated in Shawn's posting. They are, in fact, made of Scalamandre 100% pure silk dyed gold, fabric which today costs about $300 a yard; they are lined with jet black Dupioni silk. This color combination is particularly characteristic of the richn medeival appreciation for comtrasting color. With the exception of the orphrey's which were attached by machine, the vestments are entirely hand made with a meticulous attention given to the interplay of the fabric's design at the seams. The vestments are piped with black and gold cord, the stoles being adorned with alternating jet black and gold tassles.
These vestments were not sold by the CRNJ to Saint Michael's Abbey. We offered to make them in gratitude for the charity shown to us by the canons of the Abbey. The cost of the fabric was covered by one of the canon's parents. The work of designing, procuring materials - an exceptional difficulty due precisely to the things mentioned by you in your comment - and fabrication was a gift from us.
Again, Father, thank you for your knowledgable contribution to the posting.
Dom Daniel Augustine, CRNJ
I have in the past commissioned Salbbink to make vestments for me (until I discovered Tridntinum),and they did splendidly as long as you stay in charge.The vestments were very full and heavily ornamented.I also had a conical set,the Thomas a`Becket chasuble with dalmatic and tunicle.They have a great history in making beautiful vestments,why they have abandoned it for the lirtu-trash they have been doing these past30 years I dont know.I have had people talk to them telling they are missing out a on a large market of younger priests but they are unconvinced.By the way I like conicals since a chasuble is suppsed to be "a little house"-casula.
I have nothing against conical chasubles, and this is certainly an excellent exemplar.
However, dear Fr. McAfee, I simply find the argument (which one hears often) that full chasubles are better because the chasuble is suppsed to be "a little house"-casula unconvincing. The word chasuble may come from there, but why should that have to dictate how the vestment looks like? Is a trenchcoat only a good coat if it is actually fit to be worn in trenches? The word pen comes from penna - feather: would it be best to return to writing with a quill? No offence, but this is simply not an argument, in my eyes.
Dom Daniel Augustine CRNJ
Thank you for your welcome response to an earlier comment. It sets Shawn's post and the photographs into an informed context and many readers will be grateful for your description of the materials and work that went into their design and execution. They are a triumph and I hope they will encourage readers to commission work from you.
Forgive me for mistaking the black lining for dark blue. I am glad you used piped chord for edging the chasuble. This was, as you know, frequently used in the best Gothic vestments of the past. We have a fine example of the early-c20 at Farm Street which came from St George's, Sudbury, and it is simple to wear if you know how to use it.
The only minor criticism I have of your splendid vestments is that I think the fringes on the stole are a little too long. In late-medieval examples they were shorter. But that is little more than a quibble. I especially like the long dalmatic which was common in the past but is now rarely seen. Congratulations on your design and workmanship.
A final point which some might have noticed is the question of cost. The best vestments are always expensive and there is no way round this problem. But ultimately this is economical because, if looked after properly, they will last longer and their comparatively infrequent use will also contribute to their longevity. I hope they are kept flat in drawers, protected by linen cloths. Your generosity in presenting them to St Michael's Abbey is truly sacrificial and goes beyond the call of duty.
Dear Latin Mass,
When did I ever advert to the maniple? As far as its being awkward or motion-inhibiting, I would have no idea. The last time I wore a maniple, I was about ten years old "playing Mass"!
Very nice, although my personal preference is for the "Halberstadt" late-gothic.
Does anyone know where such can be made (orphreys and all)?
Now, the next thing is to abandon tabernacle altars and re-introduce hanging pyxes and sacrament houses.
I love the "hanging pyx" concept. The Cathedral in SLC Ut has a sacrament house. I love it too.
Hanging pyxes are a problem logisitically. One needs a diocesan indult to install, since the rubrics are clear, and secondly, there are saftey issues with regard to theft. Secondly, there'd have to be a pretty big pyx to hold a ciborium of even modest proportions to hold a reasonable amt. of hosts for current needs. The traditional altar pyxes were rather small.
Fr. Stravinskas!!
You haven't said the Old Mass? That means you've been bucked from "conservative" or "traditional" to "middle of the road".
Basile,
Sic transit gloria mundi. I guess I'll have to wait for the Liturgy of Heaven!
Paul Waddington said: "The secret of wearing vestments like these is to draw the chasuble back beyond the wrists in order to avoid the hazards you mention. When you look at medieval panel paintings and monumental brasses invariably you find chasubles used in this way."
Paul,I would be inclined to think that it isn't all that simple. After all, there must have been a reason for cutting them back until one had a fiddleback. And this wasn't just a fad. It took place over the centuries as a truly continuous development
Interestingly there was quite a move toward ample chasubles in the latter half of the 1960's but it seems not to have lasted and most modern chasubles have now returned to the normal gothic revival size that was used up until Vat. II.
A priest once said to me, "What makes fiddlebacks seem inherently to be ritual garments is that they make absolutely no sense in any other context.
I certainly related to with his comment because I had often thought the same thing myself.
David O'Rourke
It was me who made the comment in response to Paul Waddington's statement that full Gothic chasubles presented dangers to the celebration of Mass.
I wrote my response on the basis of personal experience of occasionally wearing such vestments. If you do not draw the chasuble back beyond the wrists they are indeed cumbersome and you will notice in the illustrations to Shawn's post that there is an indication that the celebrant has done so. And, as I pointed out, indications of how they were worn in the Middle Ages is found in illuminations, panel paintings and monumental brasses.
The reason for the abandonment of the full Gothic shape is different from experience of their actual use. I am sure that it was for practical reasons that during the 15th and 16th centuries chasubles were greatly reduced in size until they reached what scholars of the liturgical movement described as a deteriorated form embodied in the classic Latin chasuble.
Although my own preference is for Latin vestments, I do not deplore full Gothic chasubles on practical or aesthetic grounds. Knowing how to wear them makes sense when put into practise.
Conical vestments always seem to draw excited commentary here.
I can only say the vestments are absolutely lovely.
I found another conical chasuble from red silk damask on this site:
http://saintbedestudio.blogspot....l-
chasuble.html
Here is one of the best pictures I have ever seen of the conical chasuble.
http://images.google.com/imgres?
...uCSEILOM6qzrO8N
Father Stavinkas,
Stand your ground. A priest's orthodoxy does not rise or fall on whether he celebrates the OF or EF. I have never been at a celebration of your Holy Mass, but I am sure that it is reverent, and correctly done. Please continue to post.
Scalzo
Scalzo,
Thanks for the vote of confidence.
Well it's just a big love-fest here isn't it? Personally I love conicals and will be ordained in one as it is the custom of my Archdiocese. I also plan on having my Mass of Thanksgiving in one. Yes they are a bit ackward. Yes you have to practice in them. But the idea of "casula" is simply more pronounced in a conical.
Commenting by HaloScan
