You might not have said it outright, but I think it was pretty much implied with your reference to a man and his wedding ring. :rolleyes:
A link was posed earlier in this thread, but no one seems to be paying attention to Br. Jay's words, so here they are~
Origianally posted by Br. JReducation here
First: the idea that the Roman Collar is a priestly garb is a mistaken idea of the Catholic laity. I'm not sure where or when the mistake started.
Second: the Roman Collar shirt is neither clerical nor Roman. It began with the Church of Scotland.
Third: in the USA, the Fourth Council of Baltimore ruled that all priests had to wear a Roman collar, because it was the norm for the Episcopal Church in the USA and it was unsafe for Catholic priests to standout in public.
Fourth: religious orders protested, because many priests are BOTH. That is, they are priests and religious. Wearing the Roman collar would set them apart from the other religious who are not priests.
Fifth: the religious orders won out. The Holy Father ruled that the bishops had no authority to demand that ALL priests wear Roman collars, but only those priests who are subject to the bishops. Other priests who are subject to a religious superior are to wear whatever their community requires them to wear, be it a habit or secular clothing.
Sixth: in 1983, Canon Law said that priests wear whatever is customary for clergy in the local region.
Seventh: Canon Law still protects the rights of priests who are both, religious and priest, to be free of the aforementioned canon. In other words, the constitution of the community takes precedence over the canon, when it comes to dress. They wear whatever the constitution says they wear.
Eighth: the Roman Collar in the West is worn by clergy, seminarians and religious brothers, NOT JUST PRIESTS. Therefore, it's does not identify a man as a priest.
Ninth: religious orders that had habits did not wear the Roman Collar until the 1930s. Everyone wore a habit, which made the priest anonymous.
Tenth: today, those religious orders that allow the Roman Collar, require that everyone: priests, brothers, seminarians, and novices wear it for the sake of fraternity. Again, the priests are deliberately anonymous, because everyone is wearing the same thing.
Eleventh: those religious orders that do not have a habit, have their own dress code.
Twelfth: the diocesan bishop has the authority to regular what HIS priests wear while on duty, but not off duty.
Thirteenth: the diocesan bishop may NEVER regulate what regular priests wear, nor what secular priests wear who belong to a society or to a secular institute. The constitutions regulate this.
Fourteenth: the Roman Collar is not a universal garb. In many countries it is unknown. The Roman Collar was originally the name of the collar on a Roman cassock. It as not a shirt with a specific collar. The shirt is of Scottish Protestant origin brought to the USA by the Anglicans. If one observes, not all cassocks have a Roman collar. The Oratorians, Redemptorists, Passionists and Vincentians wore cassocks with different kinds of collars. Some still do.
Fifteenth: many religious communities, societies of apostolic life and institutes are moving away from the Roman Collar, because it makes everyone look the same. Franciscans want to be Franciscans. Jesuits want to be Jesuits. Dominicans want to be Dominicans and so forth. If we want to look the same, we wear street clothes. Many secular priests object to the religious wearing Roman Collars, because it makes them all look the same. Secular priests do not want to be confused with religious. If they had a call to the consecrated life, they would have joined a religious community.
That's the deal on Roman Collars.
[quote="NickD, post:18, topic:315146"]
I never said anything about being "less of a priest" for not wearing the collar; I simply meant that it looks odd to know that a priest does not wear it. As someone posted earlier, look at this : http://www.ewtn.com/library/PRIESTS/RMCOLLAR.TXT
It is rather thorough, and yes does discuss times of recreation. As someone posted earlier, His Holiness John Paul II didn't wear his clerical dress while skiing; but goodness knows he did at almost any other time!