Tuesday, March 31, 2009

What is wrong with this picture?

Even a kid can understand that some dress is appropriate or fitting for the hour and some is not.
As kids when when my brother and I dressed well our dad would sometimes say: "You boys look sharp." This meant a lot and taught us well.
In this image one guy looks sharp and the other does not. If you are in a position of trust and leadership such as the priesthood then dress for the hour and accept no substitutions and you will be respected for it.
This post is dedicated to Rev. Mons. R.J. Schuler, R.I.P.


Anonymous said...

the well-dressed Priest in the middle looks a little uncomfortable at having his photo taken...

Anonymous said...

The LC always look the best! ;-)

Raphaela said...

I see what you mean, John... but on the other hand, at least they are both wearing recognisable clerical attire. If more of the priests in my diocese went around looking like the gent on the right whom you're objecting to, that would be an improvement over current conditions!

Anonymous said...

I think you are being judgemental. The priest you are finding fault with is wearing his collar. So, he is wearing a windbreaker.What is wrong with that. Maybe it was donated or he pulled it out of a pile of used clothing. Or maybe it was inexpensive at the store. The other is probably an LC priest and a suit is their uniform.

Let's be careful and respect and uphold our priests instead of being overly critical of them. Image is not everything, and in fact is nothing. The world judges by image.

I enjoy your blog alot but sometimes it seems you are overly judgemental of religious who don't fit your view of what you think they should look like. I'm not talking about religious who are not wearing the habit but those who are. Methinks you would be critical of what St. Thomas looked like in his day!


Anonymous said...

All two of the here depicted forms of dress are superflous. Both priests are wearing in effect lay clothes plus the absolut minimum of clerical attire, namely the collar. The Lc in the middle could also be a pastor of any protestant sect. What is so difficult by wearing the soutane??

John Paul Sonnen said...

pax vobis and thanks for the input.

the reason for the post was the lassitude of clerical dress experienced in recent decades.

clergy identity is to be aptly and harmoniously interwoven and this is done in part in dress, too.

priesty identity has suffered in recent years and this has been mirrored in part in goofy dress (i.e. any color but black, etc.).

uniformity in priestly identity is to accrue to the benefit of the priest, his brother priests and religious and to all others, catholic and non-catholic alike.

inspire vocations and look sharp.

Anonymous said...

I liken it to being in battle. If your platoon sergeant showed up in a Hawaiian shirt and khaki cutoffs, would you be inspired him into battle? Bearing means much in the military, and it means much if we are soldiers of Christ. BTW, to the third other Anonymous poster, you have to be joking, right? I mean, the priest in the middle "could also be a pastor of any protestant sect"? With all due respect on the eve of Holy Thursday, you have got to be kidding. ~ Brian

Smiley said...

oh oh did I tell you the time i met our parish priest at the supermarket. He was in civilian clothes no collar nothing. I was brought up in a country where you said good morning father or wished him as per the time of day and the priests always wore their collars and white habits unless it was a special occasion then they wore the black one.
So not knowing that in the west priests like to be incognito outside the church i said good evening father. ohh he turned a shade of purple everyone around looked at me and him like we were both crazy. it did not bother me as much as it bothered him. i don't know why it did. none the less after that he has been seen around town in the clerical collar.