Can White Vestments Be Worn at All Times?

Go up to an average American Roman Catholic priest and ask them, “When can white vestments be worn?” and you will probably receive the answer, “Always.” It is commonly thought that white is the default color for vestments; however, a natural follow-up question is why? Or where does this rule come from? The first place to go in order to answer this second question is the General Instruction of the Roman Missal¹ since it is there that such instructions are outlined.

Turning to the GIRM, we happily find a description of which colored vestments are to be worn for which occasion. GIRM 346 explains the colors worn throughout the liturgical year:

As to the color of sacred vestments, the traditional usage is to be retained: namely,

1. White is used in the Offices and Masses during the Easter and Christmas seasons; also on celebrations of the Lord other than of his Passion, of the Blessed Virgin Mary, of the Holy Angels, and of Saints who were not Martyrs; on the Solemnities of All Saints (November 1) and of the Nativity of St. John the Baptist (June 24); and on the Feasts of St. John the Evangelist (December 27), of the Chair of St. Peter (February 22), and of the Conversion of St. Paul (January 25).
2. Red is used on Palm Sunday of the Lord’s Passion and on Good Friday, on Pentecost Sunday, on celebrations of the Lord’s Passion, on the feasts of the Apostles and Evangelists, and on celebrations of Martyr Saints.
3. Green is used in the Offices and Masses of Ordinary Time.
4. Violet or purple is used in Advent and Lent. It may also be worn in Offices and Masses for the Dead.
5. Besides violet, white or black vestments may be worn at funeral services and at other Offices and Masses for the Dead in the dioceses of the United States of America.
6. Rose may be used, where it is the practice, on Gaudete Sunday (Third Sunday of Advent) and on Laetare Sunday (Fourth Sunday of Lent).
7. On more solemn days, sacred vestments may be used that are festive, that is, more precious, even if not of the color of the day.
8. Gold or silver colored vestments may be worn on more solemn occasions in the dioceses of the United States of America.

One should note after reading this list that nowhere does it say the default color is white, or that white can substitute for any color. White is given specific times when it is worn. Note, though, that items G and H in the list do provide some discretion to the priest in changing the color, so if you squint this could be the occasion for our original answer.

In these cases we are given two keys which we must understand in order to apply G and H correctly. What are solemn days and what are festive or precious vestments? A solemn day is a day in which a liturgical celebration of a higher rank than a normal ferial day is celebrated. The key here is that a solemn day is set apart from our normal celebrations, and instead is marked with elevated reverence on account of the occasion. Turning to the quality of vestments as festive or precious, this is in part straightforward; those vestments which more clearly express the solemnity of the occasion, even if the primary color is not of the day, are permitted since they contribute to the solemn character of the liturgy. The (then) Congregation of Divine Worship in their instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum² further clarified what is meant by festive and precious vestments stating:

This faculty, which is specifically intended in reference to vestments made many years ago, with a view to preserving the Church’s patrimony, is improperly extended to innovations by which forms and colors are adopted according to the inclination of private individuals, with disregard for traditional practice, while the real sense of this norm is lost to the detriment of the tradition. (RS 127, emphasis added)

Properly, then, this permission for changing vestment colors on account of their precious character has to do with preserving the Church’s material patrimony and the authentic sense of the celebration, but it is not to give permission for individuals to change colors for their personal preferences. Thus far, grounds for using white vestments at any celebration seem unfounded; however, the above-mentioned GIRM 346 only deals with the liturgical-year cycle. There is another set of Masses, the Ritual and Votive Masses, which have their own norms governing the color of vestments. In GIRM 347 we read:

Ritual Masses are celebrated in their proper color, in white, or in a festive color; Masses for Various Needs, on the other hand, are celebrated in the color proper to the day or the season or in violet if they are of a penitential character, for example, in The Roman Missal, no. 31 (in Time of War or Conflict), no. 33 (in Time of Famine), or no. 38 (for the Forgiveness of Sins); Votive Masses are celebrated in the color suited to the Mass itself or even in the color proper to the day or the season.

Here we do find white is the default color for Ritual Masses, but it is because they are more festive and solemn in character and so the logic of GIRM 346 G is being applied. Importantly, though white is the default color for Ritual Masses, it is not for Masses for Various Needs or Votive Masses. For Masses for Various Needs and Votive Masses the color is decided by both “the day or the season” and the character of the Mass formulary. The default here is not white, but the underlying liturgical season’s color. Now certainly, a case can rightly be made for white in many Votive Masses and Masses for Various Needs, but not for all since some are clearly of a penitential character, “for example, in The Roman Missal, no. 31 (in Time of War or Conflict), no. 33 (in Time of Famine), or no. 38 (for the Forgiveness of Sins)” and so violet is to be worn in these Masses.

This leaves us in an interesting position, since we have yet to find a clear case as to why white can licitly be worn at any Mass. Certainly it can be worn for Ritual Masses, those cases outlined in GIRM 346 A, and many Masses for Various Needs and Votive Masses. Further, on solemn celebrations a festive vestment with a white background can be worn. This, though, is a far cry from the original premise that white can be worn whenever.

Where does this idea then come from? The GIRM does not give clear reasons to think that a priest could wear white whenever, so why do so many think that they can? Turning once more to the GIRM, the word white is only used in a few places: when speaking of the vestments (GIRM 346, 347, and 373), in regard to the altar cloth (GIRM 117, and 304), and for the chalice veil (GIRM 118). These paragraphs either do not help answer our question, or we already have looked at them. The sole exception is the instruction for the chalice veil, which reads, interestingly, “It is a praiseworthy practice for the chalice to be covered with a veil, which may be either of the color of the day or white.” Here we do in fact find white acting as the default color; however, this does not justify transferring this logic to vestments, since vestments have clearly defined norms regulating their colors. If there was a lacuna in what color vestment was to be worn in a particular celebration, this could give us a hermeneutic to interpret the law with itself; however, there is no such ambiguity in regard to what color vestment is to be worn at a particular celebration. Instead, therefore, this norm only applies to the chalice veil.

The astute reader, though, may recall that there is some provision for white vestments with concelebration. When there are a large number of concelebrants, “out of necessity the concelebrants other than the principal celebrant may even put on white chasubles.”³ In this case, concelebrants may default to white chasubles no matter the occasion. This, though, is an exception from the norm, since they are vested differently from how the principal celebrant is vested. The norm is that the principal celebrant is always in the proper color according to the day/celebration. Earlier in the same paragraph from the Instruction, it states:

A faculty is given in the Roman Missal for the priest concelebrants at Mass other than the principal celebrant (who should always put on a chasuble of the prescribed color), for a just reason such as a large number of concelebrants or a lack of vestments, to omit “the chasuble, using the stole over the alb.” (GIRM 209) Where a need of this kind can be foreseen, however, provision should be made for it insofar as possible. (RS 124, emphasis added)

Two important things are highlighted here. First, even if the concelebrants, on account of their large numbers, are vested differently from the principal celebrant, the principal celebrant is still vested in the proper color according to the previously outlined norms. Second, in this situation of a large number of concelebrants, it is still the default to follow the proper vesting norms unless it is not possible to do so. Even in this situation, white is not the default color for the principal celebrant or even the concelebrants. The default color is the proper color of the celebration, and the concelebrants are instead dispensed from this norm. So the notion of extending the dispensation for concelebrants to wear white to other situations is explicitly blocked in the cited paragraph of the Instruction. This leaves us with the conclusion that white in fact cannot licitly be worn at any Mass, but only in the situations as we have outlined above.⁴

There is one final recourse to wearing white at all times which one may make, and that is the canonical notion of custom. Custom is a means by which certain traditions of communities can attain to the force of law outside of the ordinary means of promulgating law. It is a means by which law is proposed by a community of the faithful and becomes law with at least the presumed approval of the proper legislator. This is normally determined by the length of time that the custom is in practice (30 continuous years minimum⁵) and the legislator is reasonable aware of the custom. As noted above in RS 124, the universal legislator rejects the notion of the principal celebrant wearing white at any time, so this custom would go against the written law. In this case then, for this to be a custom it would need to be in practice for at least a continuous century. This is calculated from the time when the most recent law, which is relevant to the custom in question, was promulgated. In this case that would be the current English translation of the Roman Missal promulgated in 2011. As such the practice does not meet the requirements of a custom by time alone.

Further, it is unclear if it could become a custom given sufficient time since in canon 24 §2, “a custom contrary or beyond canon law cannot obtain the force of law unless it is reasonable; a custom which is expressly reprobated in the law, however, is not reasonable.” In our case, defaulting to white vestments is contrary to the law as noted above, where it is not explicitly reprobated, but it is implicitly reprobated given the logic of RS 124. Further, GIRM 347 states that, “violet [vestments are worn] if [the Masses for Various Needs] are of a penitential character,” and GIRM 345 says, “the purpose of a variety in the color of the sacred vestments is to give effective expression even outwardly to the specific character of the mysteries of faith being celebrated.” This indicates that wearing white on all occasions is in fact unreasonable since it goes against the logic or reason (ratio) of using different colors with certain liturgical celebrations.

Therefore, it appears that this custom cannot attain to the force of law, since it is unreasonable both by the logic of colors employed in the Roman Missal and the implicit reprobation of universal law. Thus neither the written law nor legal custom permit white vestments to be worn in any given celebration of Mass. And so we are left with the answer to our original question, “When can white vestments be worn?” White vestments can only be worn in the circumstances as outlined above.

Some practical objections may arise, though. What if all I have are white vestments? First, one should plan ahead so that this does not happen; all sacristies are to have the proper vestments required to celebrate Mass.⁶ If a sacristy under one’s control is not properly furnished, they have an obligation to properly furnish it. If one knows that a sacristy is not properly furnished, but they do not control it, they ought to supply what is missing by other means, if even temporarily. If one truly finds themselves in a situation out of their control and can only wear white, it is clearly better to be properly vested in the wrong color than improperly vested in the correct color.⁷ This should only be in extraordinary circumstances.

A corollary is found in the situation of priests traveling. This is a situation over which we as priests have control, and so maintains the obligation to celebrate Mass according to all the norms which govern it, vestment color included. Simply traveling does not create an extraordinary circumstance to justify using improper colors. Further, neither the GIRM (see 119 A, 209, and 337) nor RS (see 123 and 124) permit the principal celebrant to ever omit the chasuble; only concelebrants are permitted to omit the chasuble. The great dignity of the celebration of the Mass requires us to conform ourselves to the norms in celebrating it, not the Mass to our comforts and conveniences.

One final theological objection may be, if every Mass is a celebration of the Resurrection, then white should be permitted to be worn at every Mass. Certainly it is true that the Mass is a memorial of the Resurrection, but it is also a memorial of Christ’s passion and death. This logic could argue just as forcefully for violet and black being the default color. The problem is that in both cases, the logic of the liturgical year and its use of diverse colors is undermined by such notions. GIRM 345 explicitly states that:

The purpose of a variety in the color of the sacred vestments is to give effective expression even outwardly to the specific character of the mysteries of faith being celebrated and to a sense of Christian life’s passage through the course of the liturgical year.

Though the fullness of Christ and therefore the Paschal Mystery is present in every Mass, we as finite temporal beings need to reflect upon this reality in discrete portions throughout time. The liturgical year presents aspects of this reality to us for our reflection, and so helps lead us into deeper contemplation of the singular mystery of our redemption and sanctification in Christ. The theology of the liturgical year in fact requires the use of different colors; it is the universal tradition of the Church, East and West, to employ diverse colors in our liturgical celebrations. May the rich tradition of our liturgical colors be seen as an invitation to meditation upon Christ’s redemption and sanctification of the varied moments of our lives.