HELP PLEASE - Vatican Dress Code (Especially Men)

[teeredi2cruise]

I found this picture on the internet regarding dress. I am really interested if someone could help me with what the men in our tour group should wear to visit the Vatican. 

 

[CruiserBruce]

Knees and shoulders must be covered. Pretty straight forward. True of many, if not most religious buildings in Europe.

[dogs4fun]

Right - no shorts or muscle shirts.

[teeredi2cruise]

27 minutes ago, dogs4fun said:

Right - no shorts or muscle shirts.

I understand no shorts, but I call what the picture of  "man"  on the left long shorts.

[CruiserBruce]

1 hour ago, teeredi2cruise said:

I understand no shorts, but I call what the picture of  "man"  on the left long shorts.

Capri style pants for men are not uncommon in Europe...again, the requirement is that knees and shoulders are covered. For men and women.

[marazul]

As cruiserbruce said: Knees and shoulders must be covered.

So it's not what the garment is called, it is whether it is long enough to cover the knees.  

 

BTW - I think the yellow figures represent women and the purple men.  But the lower yellow shorts figure could be unisex.

[teeredi2cruise]

Perfect. Thanks everyone for your feedback.

[dogs4fun]

The "fashion police" at St. Peters are often inconsistent - I have witnessed men with calf length pants (guess these would be considered capris) turned away & women with mini skirts & bare midriffs allowed to pass. It all depends on the whim of the guards on the day of your visit. Knees, shoulders covered for women. If a man, I would not take the chance of denial of entry and would wear long pants. On occasion, I have even seen men & women with shorts (above the knee) inside the basilica - totally inconsistent enforcement of dress code.

In the photo, orange = women; purple=men

Edited August 29, 2019 by dogs4fun

[cruisemom42]

I'm pretty certain that the sign is meant to depict pants for men, not shorts.

 

However, as mentioned above, enforcement can be a little inconsistent. I'd just go with some lightweight pants (not jeans) if worried about the heat.  Some recommend the pants with zip-off legs that you can buy at hiking/sporting stores but I know my son found them uncomfortable.

 

[teeredi2cruise]

I think we will err on the side of caution and go with the long pants.

[Host Bonjour]

On the day I tried to visit, men with lederhosen (genuine!) from Austria were prohibited from visiting, as was I. It was a very hot day in late May and I had dressed in a way that I could have attended my own church in Brooklyn. I got past the first round of security checks...well, they kind of let me pass. Not so with the second round, despite managing to fashion a large shawl from the dust cover of my Furla purchase, which even went with my outfit. The Austrians were equally surprised and like me, very disappointed though if they'd not attended catholic school for half their education, including university, perhaps less so. They also hadn't traveled as far. Nevertheless...it wasn't time for mass or an audience. Just to see the museum and Sistine Chapel or the basilica I suppose. 

 

I get the request to dress appropriately but for the most part, people do so when out and about, dining, going to museums, shows, and such. I don't like that it separates people or denies them entrance from places of historical significance and that the representatives of the institution are themselves (quite!!!) imperfect, as we all are. Francis himself has been teaching an evermore non-judgmental, tolerant, and loving way. Denying people entrance into places of such significance not only in religion but in history, or art, and architecture is limiting and it feels judgmental and no, not specifically personal, which...I don't know...from a branding point of view, makes little sense; I've great had trouble with that for years, now more so than ever.  But it was never the church I knew. 

 

I would comply with requirements for other religions, and to attend a MASS here, but these buildings are museums, not just church structures. I could abstain from entering the basilica. They represent history, not only religion. To turn people away in 2019, let alone in the early aughts, I don't know. It's not what I understand the teachings to be about or, basically just makes no sense in the face of current day truths. By all means, if someone is truly inappropriate, there's a reason for denying them entrance as children and presumably compliant clergy and whomever are afoot. But if they're good enough to be out and about in society without getting arrested for indecency, honestly, I have had enough of the fashion police. I've held off from saying it for awhile but I'm done with it. Standards matter, but reality does do, as does not placing judgment on others while, how does it go...is one's own house in order? And then there's always What would you know who do? My guess would be, let people inside. 4,000 miles or more is a long way to travel.

 

Enough pontificating, pun not intended although he's kind of a cool person, and I don't mean to tread on anyone else's views or thoughts (and always very very helpful suggestions to travelers, thank you!!!) and it's absolutely of course not a Cruise Critic opinion, just me. I just want people to be able to enjoy things without having to worry about having zip-off pants, carrying extra stuff in their bag, or whatever so they can see some of the most exquisite art in the world, not even catholic. 

 

Sticking to offseason travel has worked well for me for a lot of reasons, probably always the way to go. Because layers. 😁

 

 

[cruisemom42]

1 hour ago, Host Bonjour said:

Denying people entrance into places of such significance not only in religion but in history, or art, and architecture is limiting and it feels judgmental and no, not specifically personal, which...I don't know...from a branding point of view, makes little sense; I've great had trouble with that for years, now more so than ever. 

 

 

Perhaps I could see this side if it really was just a museum of art or history or architecture. But it isn't; it is a place that many regard as holy, and as a good traveler I feel it is the least I can do to observe their rules in their places -- same as I would observe them in a mosque in Cairo or a Buddhist temple in Japan.

 

Particularly at St. Peter's, there is not even any admission charge; all one needs to do is abide by one very simple request -- be respectful in your dress, according to our custom. They are opening their doors to me and allowing me in. It's a privilege, not a right.

 

[CruiserBruce]

7 hours ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

Perhaps I could see this side if it really was just a museum of art or history or architecture. But it isn't; it is a place that many regard as holy, and as a good traveler I feel it is the least I can do to observe their rules in their places -- same as I would observe them in a mosque in Cairo or a Buddhist temple in Japan.

 

Particularly at St. Peter's, there is not even any admission charge; all one needs to do is abide by one very simple request -- be respectful in your dress, according to our custom. They are opening their doors to me and allowing me in. It's a privilege, not a right.

 

Very well stated.

[euro cruiser]

I can also understand the issue at the museums because the Sistine Chapel is consecrated space and an active church.  There is no practical way to allow people to see the museums wearing whatever they please but turn them away from the Chapel.  Can you imagine the fights from people who've paid the fee for the museums then told they can't enter one of the primary reasons people go there?

[marazul]

4 hours ago, euro cruiser said:

I can also understand the issue at the museums because the Sistine Chapel is consecrated space and an active church.  There is no practical way to allow people to see the museums wearing whatever they please but turn them away from the Chapel.  Can you imagine the fights from people who've paid the fee for the museums then told they can't enter one of the primary reasons people go there?

 

The rules are stated when the tickets are bought.  If the ticket holder decides to disregard the rules, they have to expect the consequences.  I agree with cruisemom's statement completely. 

 

15 hours ago, Host Bonjour said:

But if they're good enough to be out and about in society without getting arrested for indecency, honestly, I have had enough of the fashion police.

As for Bonjour's comments, many people would be arrested if they were wearing shorts, etc in other countries, not only in their places of worship.  I can only say that we are better off respecting the rules of whichever place we visit - countries as well as specific institutions or sites.  No one has the right to be admitted into a place they do not own just because they show up.  It doesn't matter how far they had traveled or how much they want to see it. Or what their own opinions or hangups are.  

 

On the other hand, or "on the other country," those rules are changing in parts of Spain, probably due to government supplemental funding of some places.  Shorts and attire are not an issue in major cathedrals in the South - Sevilla, Cordoba, Granada and Toledo (not quite South).  There are no dress guidelines, although I suspect really skimpy beach outfits would be frowned upon.  These cathedrals are considered to be monuments/museums and church services are confined to specific chapels outside of major religious holidays.  There is always a sign outside those chapels saying they are reserved for worship.  Dress at those chapels and certainly during major holidays (Holy Week, Corpus Christi, etc) should be more conservative.   And, yes, the more conservative rules still apply to the Sagrada Familia and to the Basilica in Zaragoza.

[Keith1010]

As others have said the rules are the rules so I always comply with them.  If I can't I just do something else.

 

Keith

[slidergirl]

A church, museum, restaurant, beach - they can set up whatever rules they want.  If a tourist wants to dress as a tourist and not appropriately to the rules, they do not deserve to enter.  Simple as that.  Same with bringing backpacks - know in advance if you will be permitted to take it into a building.   

I went to a concert the other night - no outside food or beverages were allowed.  It was an outdoor concert and the temp was 89 degrees (F) at the start.  I wasn't thrilled to have to pay $5 for a 16 oz bottle of Dasani water inside the area, but I knew the rules and paid the price.  To me, that's no different as establishing a dress code and expecting people to abide by it.  

[Host Bonjour]

I don't disagree with complying with stated or printed policies or safety rules, and I don't ever think arguing is a good idea anywhere. As it has been stated, one must deal with it or leave, or return when in compliance. That's not what I disagree with at all, no matter the place or the faith. Rules are rules. I left and didn't go back despite having plenty of time to do so. 

 

Didn't go into the colosseum either, I had no desire to be in this place where awful things happened to people for sport, not so very far from St. Peter's and countless churches in the city that is the home of my church. It was cool just seeing it from outside and exploring so much of the other history within the phenomenal city.

 

What I was getting at was the 2019 of things, the subjectivity of what is/isn't appropriate based on....well, a lot of things. Again, I wonder, if the very person who is revered at the core of this holy place was to be questioned ca. the year 30, would it matter what anyone wore to visit, so long as it was fine to wear out in ordinary society? Everyone arrives into the world with nothing and are imperfect. 

 

But to recap, I don't ever encourage anyone to flout rules, requirements, guidelines, anywhere for any reason. Abstain, don't argue. I guess maybe....one thing I am always, always enamored of when I have traveled abroad, in Italy and most places, was the immense hospitality from locals that I have encountered. One feels it in such a way that is difficult to compare to anything in the U.S., despite having been in some wonderfully warm, welcoming, lovely places. It's just...different. And I guess the thing was with being unable to be at the home of one's own religion felt oh so very...unwelcoming. And it wasn't personal, obviously. Just didn't feel good, for sure. Especially odd after having a non-traumatic catholic education (including university, more theology!) experience.

 

Thanks to everyone for taking time to reply and share important thoughts. No one hated on me and I'm grateful 😉  

 

 

[cruisemom42]

2 hours ago, Host Bonjour said:

 

Didn't go into the colosseum either, I had no desire to be in this place where awful things happened to people for sport, not so very far from St. Peter's and countless churches in the city that is the home of my church.

 

Okay, I'm going into Roman history geek mode now: 

 

If you were standing in the piazza in front of St. Peter's, you were actually standing in another venue where "awful things happened to people for sport", a.k.a. Nero's Circus. Emperor Nero probably was responsible for the highest number of Christians persecuted (and killed) in Rome following the great fire of AD 64 in that city (which he tried to pin on them). Although, to be fair, other emperors persecuted/killed more Christians throughout the extent of the Roman empire.

 

In fact, Peter himself is thought to have been crucified, upside down, in the circus there, and buried nearby, which is why St. Peter's basilica is where it is....

 

The obelisk in the center of the piazza once stood in the central spina of the circus, which was primarily used for chariot racing. The spina was where the crucifixions were carried out. Even though the position of the obelisk was shifted a bit when the new St. Peter's basilica was constructed, it is not that far from its original location.

[ReneeFLL]

On 8/29/2019 at 8:25 AM, teeredi2cruise said:

I understand no shorts, but I call what the picture of  "man"  on the left long shorts.

No, I just think he has long feet. 

[Host Bonjour]

8 hours ago, marazul said:

As for Bonjour's comments, many people would be arrested if they were wearing shorts, etc in other countries, not only in their places of worship.  I can only say that we are better off respecting the rules of whichever place we visit - countries as well as specific institutions or sites.  No one has the right to be admitted into a place they do not own just because they show up.  It doesn't matter how far they had traveled or how much they want to see it. Or what their own opinions or hangups are.  

 

Fair enough. And again, I agree with abiding by every and any law. I was clearly not suggesting violating any rule, requirement, or law anywhere. And expecting to gain admittance to a privately owned place, well that's not legal either, it would be trespassing, or...worse. 

 

When Notre Dame was on fire, people of all faiths from all around the world were sad because it is a place that has welcomed people for centuries no matter who they are or where they are from. It is a safe place. It touched everyone. Save for waiting online, and security, it is not a challenge to enter. The same at St. Patrick's Cathedral, Reims Cathedral, and now it seems too, in Spain, churches all over England and Scotland, buddhist shrines in Hong Kong and China - I  did ask if it was ok to enter. My questions weren't why not me, or why not let's protest. It's just why now, still. I get that there are particular moments, like Mass, when if that's what they want, ok. But otherwise, in face of teaching tenets that are meant to be accepting and tolerant of one another, why turn anyone away due to their knees or shoulders. 

 

But it's not illegal to wear shorts or skirts or sleeveless tops in Italy. To this end, the Dalai Llama would be refused because his robe exposes one shoulder and yet, the Dalai Llama has been photographed with Francis dressed in his usual way, as it ought to be. The Dalai Llama is infinitely holier than I could ever aim to be and he got in. 

 

All I'm saying is I wish it was about how we conduct ourselves rather than what we look like. Enough of that already. I understand and hear the points about the significance of these places and it is not lost on me. It's not about causing any disruption. There's too much of that...that's exactly the point. Why, of all places, here? 

 

I appreciate what everyone is saying and I thank you all so much. 

[Host Bonjour]

12 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

Okay, I'm going into Roman history geek mode now: 

 

If you were standing in the piazza in front of St. Peter's, you were actually standing in another venue where "awful things happened to people for sport", a.k.a. Nero's Circus. Emperor Nero probably was responsible for the highest number of Christians persecuted (and killed) in Rome following the great fire of AD 64 in that city (which he tried to pin on them). Although, to be fair, other emperors persecuted/killed more Christians throughout the extent of the Roman empire.

 

In fact, Peter himself is thought to have been crucified, upside down, in the circus there, and buried nearby, which is why St. Peter's basilica is where it is....

 

The obelisk in the center of the piazza once stood in the central spina of the circus, which was primarily used for chariot racing. The spina was where the crucifixions were carried out. Even though the position of the obelisk was shifted a bit when the new St. Peter's basilica was constructed, it is not that far from its original location.

 

Always love the history 😄

 

And I knew how St. Peter's came to be named St. Peter's...lots of religion and theology classes though I cannot ever, and wouldn't ever try with the history 😉  I didn't stay there long...well yes, there's the crusades and people dying in the name of religion and war forever. It just wasn't always in an arena, that's kind of my point. And there are other places in the world with bloody histories on its land for money or religion, often both, (near where I live, how Wall Street got its name). But we change, or make progress hopefully, try to do better, because...progress? 

 

Plus, looking at some of the fashion from Rome 2,000 years ago, I see some things that would not past muster at St. Peter's today but to be fair, the church didn't exist yet. 

 

I'm not going to stop wondering why. Maybe it's too meta, and wondering is often not popular.  

[vettegal99]

Just back from 14 day Med cruise.  We were at the Vatican on Friday Sept 27.  Very crowded and hot for what is considered off season.  Fashion police were lenient that day.  Saw many men in shorts that didn't cover their knees.  Saw one teenager asked to cover her bare shoulders.  Our Cruise Line advised us in advance  that the dress code would be in effect so we all wore long pants and no bare shoulders.  

 

[Hlitner]

 

Ok, I have to disagree with many here including a hard working CC Host.  The issue is not what you or I think the proper dress code should be but rather the standards that the Vatican chooses to enforce.  If you do not like their rules, go somewhere else.  I think this thread is typical of an attitude that has moved through America.  It might best be summed up by saying "dress codes do not matter, I can do as I please and dress as I please and nobody will dare stop me!"   We see it on ships where men wear baseball caps (usually backwards) in the MDR...sometimes even on formal nights.   They know it is not correct but could care less because we are in the age of "do as you please"   On my last Princess Cruise (CB in August) I saw a man enter the MDR on a Gala night in a wife beater shirt and nobody stopped him.  He was a grown-up, knew he was violating the dress code, but obviously could care less because according to current standards it is OK to do whatever you please.

 

So think of the outrage.  The Vatican enforced their dress code.  My goodness, they actually expect folks to show some respect by how they dress.  I know, I know.  DW would say, "Does God care how we dress in Church?"  Perhaps not, but in this case the Pope calls the shots.

 

As to our excellent CC host's comment my only come back is that Brooklyn should stick to making Black and Whites and great pizza and leave the dress code to the Pope. Personally I do not know how Brooklyn survives without Ebinger's...but I am old school :).

 

Hank

[CruiserBruce]

Bam! Hit that one out of the park @Hlitner It's their church, ship, business,  whatever. They get to make their rules, no matter how unfair you think it might be. As long as it doesn't discriminate...the rules are equally applied to everyone.