Thirteen Reasons I Wear the Cassock Rather Than the Clerical Suit

1. Catholicitas. It is a garment which has more universal relevance, e.g. across the globe (in the Middle East and Far East, and myriad primitive communities throughout the world men still wear gowns and not just trousers) and across the ages. It is also the normative universal attire for priests.

2. Traditio et pluralitas. It is more akin to the folk attire of every land and people, before the modern and ubiquitous suit. I wear the cassock in the name of tradition, all good traditions, and legitimate cultural diversity.

3. Missio. It is a sign of heaven. For example, a 10 year old boy on main street in my urban neighborhood stood looking up at me in cassock and panama hat and said in awe: "You look like an angel." "Are you an angel?" "No, I'm a Catholic priest. God bless you."

4. Vocatio. My earliest hints toward a priestly vocation came at the age of five, seeing my parish priest, Msgr. Jones, in his cassock, and in the youthful use of the red cassock and white surplice of the altar boys. The cassock beckoned the young boy to be a priest!

5. Exemplo pontificum. The Roman Pontiff does it always and everywhere, and is expected to do so. Why should anything less be expected of the lowest cleric? Notice that the religious orders which currently have vocations rightly and habitually wear their habits. The normative habit of the diocesan priest is the cassock. (Directory for the Life and Ministry of Priests, 1994, 66.) If you wear it people will love it (if they love you) and expect you to wear it.

6. Ius ecclesiæ. "The use of the cassock is at the discretion of the cleric." No one else should have anything to say about it! That is the law of the Church. Priests are entirely free to use the cassock whenever and wherever they wish. Lex libertas! (NCCB, recognitio on complementary legislation for Canon 284, 1999.)

7. Utilitas. The cassock is quick to put on, e.g. for emergency night calls it takes 30 seconds to put it on over whatever you are wearing! Or, when I have to go to help the priest celebrant distribute communion at Mass (as is my specific priestly duty) the surplice fits nicely over it. It makes for lighter travel, viz., it is easier to wear it for travel, than to pack it.

8. Versabilitas. It can be both formal and casual, depending on how and with what you wear it.

9. Securitas. In urban America it is safer than the suit which smacks more of secular wealth and lifestyle. I have been in my cassock in urban ministry in America for decades and have never had any conflict.

10. Apostolicitas/Claritas. The cassock more clearly identifies the cleric with the Churches within the apostolic succession (Catholic/Orthodox), avoiding being confused for Protestant clerics. It is a sign of the true Church.

11. Consolatio fidelium. It is loved by the faithful and despised by the haters of religion.

12. Humilitas. In a post-Christendom world eccesiastical attire is hardly a sign of triumph (i.e. triumphalism is historically out of the question!), it is a sign of worldly defeat, a sign of the Cross: the only real triumph which is that of the Cross, right worship, and service.

13. Reverentia. The cassock is more spiritual than the suit because it better disguises the form of the body and is more associated with the sacred rituals. It doubles as a liturgical garment, a garment of prayer. Also, there are many distinctively priestly garments which go exclusively with the cassock: e.g. biretta, saturno, cape, ferriola.

The cassock martyr!
Blessed Rolando Rivi

In response to those who counselled him regarding the impending danger of continuing to wear the cassock he said...

"I cannot, I must not take off the cassock.

"I am not afraid.

"I am proud to wear it!

"I cannot hide!

"I belong to the Lord!"

He was killed for it, and his murderers kept the cassock as a trophy of their cowardly murder of the boy.

"The Church remains something 'outside' the state, for only thus can both Church and state be what they are meant to be. Like the state, the Church too must remain in its own proper place and within its boundaries. It must respect its own being and its own freedom, precisely in order to be able to perform for the state the service that the latter requires. The Church must exert itself with all its vigor so that in it there may shine forth the moral truth that it offers to the state and that ought to become evident to the citizens of the state. This truth must be vigorous within the Church, and it must form men, for only then it will have the power to convince others and to be a force working like a leaven for all of society.

"(Soloviev's reflections on Church and state, which deserve to be pondered anew, go in the same direction, although the idea of 'theocracy' is not tenable in the form in which he elaborated it. See La grande controverse et la politique chrétienne [Paris, 1953], 129-68.)"

Ratzinger, Paris, 1992 in Values in a Time of Upheaval, San Francisco: Ignatius, 2006, 69-70.