Online Encyclopedia


Online Encyclopedia
Originally appearing in Volume V27, Page 1063 of the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica.
Spread the word: it!
VESTMENTS. The word " vestment" (Lat. vestimentum, In. vestire, to clothe), meaning generally simply an article of clothing, is in the usage of the present day practically confined to the ceremonial garments worn in public worship; in this sense it may be used equally of the robes or "ornaments" of the ministers or priests of any religion. Ecclesiastical vestments, with which the present article is solely concerned, are the special articles of costume worn by the officers of the Christian Church " at all times of their ministration "—to quote the Ornaments Rubric of the English Book of Common Prayer, i.e. as distinct from the " clerical costume " worn in everyday life. Ecclesiastical vestments may again be divided into two categories: (r) liturgical vestments, (2) non-liturgical vestments. Liturgical vestments, as their name implies, arc those which are especially associated with the various functions of the liturgy. Of these again, according to the fully developed rules of the Catholic Church, there are three classes: (ly vestments worn only at the celebration of mass— chasuble, maniple, pontifical gloves, pontifical shoes, the pallium and the papal fanone and subcinctorium; (2) vestments never worn at mass, but at other liturgical functions, such as processions, administration of the sacraments, solemn choir services, i.e. cope and surplice; (3) vestments used at both—alb, amice, girdle, stole, dalmatic, tunicle. Non-liturgical vestments are those, e.g. cappa magna, rochet, which have no sacral character, have come into use from motives of convenience or as insignia of dignity, and are worn at secular as well as ecclesiastical functions. In the controversies as to the interpretation of the Anglican " Ornaments Rubric " (see below) the term " vestments " has been applied particularly to those worn at the celebration of mass, which is what is meant when it is said that " the vestments " are worn at such and such a church. This restriction of the term has some historical justification: in the First Prayer Book of Edward VI. the word " vestment " is used as synonymous with but one liturgical garment—the chasuble, the " mass vestment " par excellence; in the Prayer Book of 1559 " vestments " are eliminated altogether, " ornaments " being substituted as a more comprehensive term. As to the use of the word, it must be further stated that it is also technically applied to altar cloths, the altar being " vested " in frontal (antependium) and super-frontal (see ALTAR). The subject of ecclesiastical vestments is not only one of great interest from the point of view of archaeology and art, but is also of importance, in so far as certain " ornaments " ,have become historically associated with certain doctrines on which the opinion of the Christian world is sharply divided. The present article can only give a brief outline of a subject as intricate as it is vast, frequently also extremely obscure, and rendered still more obscure by the fact that those who have applied themselves to it have too often done so in anything but a scientific spirit. It will deal briefly (1) with the general idea and the historical evolution of ecclesiastical vestments, (2) with the vestments as at present worn (a) in the Roman Catholic Church, (b) in the Oriental Churches, (c) in the Reformed Churches, (d) in the Anglican Church. The more important vestments are dealt with in some detail under their separate headings; here it will only be necessary to give short descriptions of those which cannot be conveniently treated separately. 1. The Origin and Idea of Ecclesiastical Vestments.—The liturgical vestments of the Catholic Church, East and West, are not, as was at one time commonly supposed, borrowed from the sacerdotal ornaments of the Jewish ritual, although the obvious analogies of this ritual doubtless to a certain extent determined their sacral character; they were developed independently out of the various articles of everyday dress worn by citizens of the Graeco-Roman world under the Empire. The officers of the Church during the first few centuries of its existence were content to officiate in the dress of civil life, though their garments were expected to be scrupulously clean and of decent quality. The few scattered references in contemporary records to the dress of the clergy all point to this as the only recognized rule. Thus in the 37th of the so-called " Canons of Hippolytus " we read: " As often as the bishops would partake of the Mysteries, the presbyters and deacons shall gather round him clad in white, quite particularly clean clothes, more beautiful than those of the rest of the people." Thus, too, St Jerome, in his commentary on Ezek. xliv. 19, says that " We, too, ought not to enter the Holy of Holies in our everyday garments ... when they have become defiled from the use of ordinary life, but with a clean conscience, and in clean garments, hold in our hands the Sacrament of the Lord." When, in the year 289, St Cyprian was led to martyrdom, he wore, according to Eusebius (Hist. eccles. iv. cap. i I), an under tunic (linea), an upper tunic (dalmatica, tunica) and mantle (lacerna, byrrus). This was the ordinary type of the civil costume of the time. The tunica, a loose sack-like tunic with a hole for the head, was the innermost garment worn by all classes of Roman citizens under the republic and empire. It was either sleeveless (colobium) or sleeved (tunica manicata or manuleata), and originally fell about to the knee, but later on reached to the ankles (tunics talaris). St Augustine (De doctr. christ. iii. cap. so, n. 20) says that to wear talares et tunicas manicatas was a disgrace among the ancient Romans, but that in his own day it was no longer so considered in the case of persons of good birth. The tunica was originally of white wool, but in the 3rd century it began to be made of linen, and from the 4th century was always of linen. About the 6th century the long tunica alba went out of fashion in civil life, but it was retained in the services of the Church and developed into the various forms of the liturgical alb (q.v.) and surplice (q.v.). The tunica dalmatica was a long, sleeved upper tunic, originating, as its name implies, in Dalmatia, and first becoming fashionable at Rome in the 2nd century; it is the origin of the liturgical dalmatic and tunicle (see DALMATIC). Another over-dress of the Romans was the paenula, a cloak akin to the poncho of the modern Spaniards and Spanish Americans, i.e. a large piece of stuff with a hole for the head to go through, hanging in ample folds round the body. This was originally worn only by slaves, soldiers and other people of low degree; in the 3rd century, however, it was adopted by fashionable people as a convenient riding or travelling cloak; and finally, by the sumptuary law of 382 (Cod. Theod. xiv. so, r, de habitu . . . infra urbem) it was prescribed as the proper everyday dress of senators, instead of the military chlamys, the toga being reserved for state occasions. This was the origin of the principal liturgical vestment, the chasuble (q.v.). As late as the 6th century these garments were common both to the clergy and laity, and, so far as their character was concerned, were used both in the liturgy and in everyday life. Meanwhile, however, a certain development had taken place. By the 4th century the garments worn at liturgical functions had been separated from those in ordinary use, though still identical in form. It is in the 4th century, too, that the first distinctive vestment makes its appearance, the di,uo¢bpcov worn by all bishops in the East; in the 5th century we find this in use at Rome under the name of pallium (q.v.), as the distinctive ornament of the pope (see fig. s). About the same time the orarium, or stole (q.v.), becomes fixed in liturgical use. The main development and definition of the ecclesiastical vestments, however, took place between the XX~'II. 's6th and the 9th centuries. The secular fashions altered with changes of taste; but the Church retained the dress with the other traditions of the Roman Empire. At Rome, especially, where the popes had succeeded to a share of the power and pretensions of the Caesars of the West, the accumulation of ecclesiastical vestments symbolized a very special dignity: in the second quarter of the 9th century the pope, when fully vested, wore a camisia girdled, an alb (linea) girdled, an amice (anagolaium), a tunicle (dalmatica minor), a dalmatic (dalmatica major), stole (orarium), chasuble (planeta) and pallium. With the exception of the pallium, this was also the costume of the Roman deacons. By this time, moreover, the liturgical character of the vestments was so completely established that they were no longer worn instead of, but over, the ordinary dress. Hitherto the example of the Roman Church had exercised no exclusive determining influence on ritual development even in the West. The popes had, from time to time, sent the pallium or the dalmatic—specifically Roman vestments—as gifts of honour to various distinguished prelates; Britain, converted by a Roman mission, had adopted the Roman use, and English missionaries had carried this into the newly Christianized parts of Germany; but the great Churches of Spain and Gaul preserved their own traditions in vestments as in other matters. From the 9th century onwards, however, this was changed; everywhere in the West the Roman use ousted the regional uses. This change synchronized with the revival of the Western Empire under Charlemagne. a revival which necessarily gave an impulse to the claims of the see of Rome. The adoption of the Roman liturgical dress had, however, at most an indirect connexion with these claims. Charlemagne was active in prescribing the adoption of the Roman use; but this was only as part of his general policy in the organization of his em- pire. A renovation of the Gallican Church was not the least crying need ; and, in view of the confusion of rites (Galli)an, Gothic, Roman, Ambrosian in 1'11' the Frankish empire, Charlemagne recognized that this innovation could only be effectually carried out by a closer connexion with Rome in ritual as in other matters. Charlemagne's activity in this respect was, in effect, but the completion of a process that had been going on since the 6th century. Whatever effect the reinvigoration of the papacy may have had in hastening the process, the original impulse towards the adoption of the Roman rite had proceeded, not from Rome, but from Spain and Gaul; it was the natural result of the lively intercourse between the Churches of these countries and the Holy See. Nor was the FIG. 2.—Stigand, Archbishop of process of assimilation by any Canterbury (1052–1070) ; trom means one-sided. If Spain and the Bayeux Tapestry. Note Gaul borrowed from Rome, they the absence of the mitre, the also exercised a reciprocal influ- chasuble short or tucked up in ence on the Roman use; it is front, the maniple still carried interesting to note in this con- in the left hand. nexion, that of the names of the liturgical vestments a very large proportion are not of Roman origin, and that the non-Roman names tended to supersede the Roman in Rome itself.' ' Apart from the archiepiscopal pallium, the Churches of Spain and Gaul had need to borrow from Rome only the dalmatic, maniple and liturgical shoes. On the other hand, it was from Spain and Gaul that Rome probably received the orarium (stole) as an ensign of the major orders. Father Braun, to whose kindness the writer is indebted for the above account of the causes of the ritual changes in the Carolingian epoch, adds that the papacy was never narrow-minded in its attitude towards local rites, and that it was not until the close of the middle ages, when diversity had become confusion and worse, that it began to insist upon uniformity. Even then it allowed those rites to survive which could prove a tradition of 200 years. The period between the 9th and the 13th centuries is that of the final development of the liturgical vestments in the West. In the 9th century appeared the pontifical gloves; in the roth, the mitre; in the 11th, the use of liturgical shoes and stockings was reserved for cardinals and bishops. By the 12th century, mitre and gloves were worn by all bishops, and in many cases they had assumed a new ornament, the rationale, a merely honorific decoration (supposed to symbolize doctrine and wisdom), sometimes of the nature of a highly ornamental broad shoulder collar with dependent lappets; sometimes closely resembling the pallium; rarely a " breast-plate " on the model of that of the Jewish high priest.1 This elaboration of the pontifical vestments was contemporaneous with, and doubtless partly determined by, the assimilation of the bishops during those centuries to the type of the great feudal nobles whose ambitions and love of pomp they shared. In an age when, with the evolution of the feudal organiza- tion of society, even everyday costume was becoming a uni- form, symbolizing in material and colour the exact status of the wearer, it was natural that in the parallel organization of the Church the official vestments should undergo a similar process of differentiation and definition. With this process, which in all its essential features was completed in the nth century, doctrinal developments had little or nothing to do, though from the 9th century onwards liturgiologists were busy expounding the mystic symbolism of garments which, until their imagination set to work, had for the most part no symbolism whatever (see below). Yet in view of later con- troversies, the changes made during this period, notably in the vestments connected with the mass, are not without significance. Hitherto the chasuble had been worn indifferently by all ministers a't the eucharist, even by the acolytes; it had been worn also at processions and other non-liturgical functions; it was now exalted into the mass vestment par excellence, worn by the celebrant only, or by his immediate assistants (deacon and subdeacon) only on very special occasions. New vestments were de- vised to take the place, on less solemn occasions, of those hallowed by associa- tion with the holy sacrifice; thus the processional cope (q.v.) appeared in the 11th century and the surplice (q.v.) in the 12th. A change, too, came over the general character of vestments. Up to the 9th century these had been very plain, without ornament save such traditional decorations as the clavi of the dalmatic; what splendour they had was due to their material and the ample folds of their draperies. But from this time onwards they tend to become more and more elaborately decorated with embroidery and jeweller's work (see, e.g. the articles CHASUBLE and COPE). Very significant, too, is the parting of the ways in the development of liturgical vestments in the East and West. During the first centuries both branches of the Church had used vest- ments substantially the same, developed from common originals; the alb, chasuble, stole and pallium were the equivalents of the trTLXapcov, 4evbXtov, iapaptov and The rationale is worn only over the chasuble. It is now used only by the bishops of Eichstatt, Cracow, Paderborn and Toul, by the special concession of various popes. See Braun, Liturg. Gewandung, pp. 676-700.c io46ptov. While, however, between the 9th and 13th centuries, the Western Church was adding largely to her store of vestments, that of the East increased her list by but three, the kexeipiov and E7rq iavtKCa (see MANIPLE) and the oiu End of Article: VESTMENTS

Additional information and Comments

Sorry, I could not find the notice about Cyprians martyrdom, wearing the civic clothes in the ecclesiastical history of Eusebius. I could not proof it in Book iV, il. Please check ist and gve me the right source.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Please link directly to this article:
Highlight the code below, right click and select "copy." Paste it into a website, email, or other HTML document.