Author Topic: Gender segregation in church (Read 5359 times)

JezusDeKoning · « **Reply #15 on:** September 01, 2018, 06:01:46 PM »

Avraham, are you an Orthodox Jєωιѕн convert? They are very, very big on sex segregation at their services -- almost obsessively so in the more fundamentalist sects.

Maria Regina · « **Reply #16 on:** September 01, 2018, 06:06:59 PM »

Quote from: Avraham Ben Yehuda on September 01, 2018, 04:28:48 PM

Do you really believe it is appropriate for a woman to be near a man in a holy place?

Do you believe that a man and a woman should be separated when they are being joined in the Holy Sacrament of Matrimony?
Isn't this the time when it is very appropriate for a groom to be next to his wife at the Nuptial Mass?

Geremia · « **Reply #17 on:** September 01, 2018, 06:20:26 PM »

1917 canon 1262:

Quote

§ 1. It is desirable that, consistent with ancient discipline, women be separated from men in church.
§ 2. Men, in a church or outside a church, while they are assisting at sacred rites, shall be bare-headed, unless the approved mores of the people or peculiar circuмstances of things determine otherwise; women, however, shall have a covered head and be modestly dressed, especially when they approach the table of the Lord.

Nadir · « **Reply #18 on:** September 01, 2018, 06:27:50 PM »

Quote from: Avraham Ben Yehuda on September 01, 2018, 05:49:18 PM

.... I am tempted to wear a blindfold when I go out in public but it is not practical.

Why do I need to tell you about my background? I do not allow women to hold authority over me.

You really should talk to your priest. I don't think you will solve your problem on a web forum.
I asked what is your cultural/religious background because
.
either you are not enculturated into western society (most CathInfo members are western, though not exclusively so)
.
or you are are a troll. (though the second option was not in my mind when I posted previously).
But of course you don't need to tell what is your cultural/religious background and I hold no authority here whatsoever.

JezusDeKoning · « **Reply #19 on:** September 01, 2018, 06:30:50 PM »

Question for Avraham:

Why are you focused on people's appearances rather than the Holy Sacrifice at Mass? You are there for the praise and worship of Almighty God and the Eucharist, not gazing at other people. If you can't avoid that, and being out in public causes temptation for you, then seek a priest.

Physically drive out and consult with a priest, as we are all laymen here.

Sorry.

Avraham Ben Yehuda · « **Reply #20 on:** September 01, 2018, 06:49:33 PM »

Quote from: JezusDeKoning on September 01, 2018, 06:30:50 PM

Question for Avraham:

Why are you focused on people's appearances rather than the Holy Sacrifice at Mass? You are there for the praise and worship of Almighty God and the Eucharist, not gazing at other people. If you can't avoid that, and being out in public causes temptation for you, then seek a priest.

Physically drive out and consult with a priest, as we are all laymen here.

Sorry.

I made this thread to understand and examine the views of traditionalists on segregated seating, not for spiritual advice regarding sin. Again, I am not focused on the appearance of others at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, my attention is directed entirely to our Blessed Lord. I simply made the comment about wearing a blindfold to say that I would rather avoid any occasion of lust. It is not something I struggle with at the moment.

But there is wisdom in preventing the issue of carnal desire from arising in the first place by segregated seating.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #21 on:** September 01, 2018, 07:04:33 PM »

Quote from: Avraham Ben Yehuda on September 01, 2018, 06:49:33 PM

I made this thread to understand and examine the views of traditionalists on segregated seating, not for spiritual advice regarding sin. Again, I am not focused on the appearance of others at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, my attention is directed entirely to our Blessed Lord. I simply made the comment about wearing a blindfold to say that I would rather avoid any occasion of lust. It is not something I struggle with at the moment.

But there is wisdom in preventing the issue of carnal desire from arising in the first place by segregated seating.

I would be all for segregated seating, based on the Church Fathers (whose reasoning is even more applicable today, than in their own times):

St. Cyril of Jerusalem (313-386):
"Let men be with men, and women with women. For now I need the example of Noah’s ark, in which were Noah and his sons, and his wife and his sons’ wives. For though the ark was one, and the door was shut, yet things had been suitably arranged. If the Church is shut, and you are all inside, yet let there be a separation, men with men, and women with women, lest the pretext of salvation become an occasion of destruction. Even if there be a fair pretext for sitting near each other, let passions be put away. (Protocatechesis, 14, NPNF 2:7)"

St. Augustine of Hippo (354-430):
"[See] the masses flock to the churches and their chaste acts of worship, where a seemly separation of the sexes is observed; where they learn how they may so spend this earthly life, as to merit a blessed eternity hereafter; where Holy Scripture and instruction in righteousness are proclaimed from a raised platform in presence of all, that both they who do the word may hear to their salvation, and they who do it not may hear to judgment. And though some enter who scoff at such precepts, all their petulance is either quenched by a sudden change, or is restrained through fear or shame. For no filthy and wicked action is there set forth to be gazed at or to be imitated; but either the precepts of the true God are recommended, His miracles narrated, His gifts praised, or His benefits implored. (City of God and Christian Doctrine, Chapter 28, NPNF 1:2)"

St. John Chrysostom (349-407):
"What are you doing, O man? Are you being overly attentive concerning the women’s beauty, and you do not shudder at thus outraging the temple of God? Does the church seem to you to be a brothel, and less honorable than the marketplace? … It would be better for such men to be blind, for it is better to be diseased than to use the eyes for such purposes.
It would be best if you had within yourself the wall to part you from the women. But since you do not desire this to be so, our fathers thought it necessary by these boards to wall you off. I hear from the elders that in the early times there was nothing like these partitions, “for in Christ Jesus there is neither male nor female” [Galatians 3:28]. And in the Apostle Paul’s time also both men and women were together, because the men were truly men, and the women were truly women. But now it is altogether to the contrary: the women have urged themselves into the manners of courtesans, and the men are in no better state than frenzied horses. (Homily LXXIII on St. Matthew, NPNF 1:10)"

PS: It is my understanding that some Eastern Catholic and Orthodox churches maintain this prudent segregation until the present day.

Maria Regina · « **Reply #22 on:** September 01, 2018, 07:13:36 PM »

St. John Chrysostom (349-407):

Quote

"What are you doing, O man? Are you being overly attentive concerning the women’s beauty, and you do not shudder at thus outraging the temple of God? Does the church seem to you to be a brothel, and less honorable than the marketplace? … It would be better for such men to be blind, for it is better to be diseased than to use the eyes for such purposes.

It would be best if you had within yourself the wall to part you from the women. But since you do not desire this to be so, our fathers thought it necessary by these boards to wall you off. I hear from the elders that in the early times there was nothing like these partitions, “for in Christ Jesus there is neither male nor female” [Galatians 3:28]. And in the Apostle Paul’s time also both men and women were together, because the men were truly men, and the women were truly women. But now it is altogether to the contrary: the women have urged themselves into the manners of courtesans, and the men are in no better state than frenzied horses. (Homily LXXIII on St. Matthew, NPNF 1:10)"

In today's society, it is far worse than in the times of St. John Chrysostom for the women wear underwear in public while the men bump into telephone poles, end up walking into public fountains, or trip and fall into man holes because they are so distracted.

Custody of the eyes is no longer practiced, and people are glued to their smart phones, so that they no longer practice the presence of God nor do they practice unceasing prayer.

Will any faith be found when Christ comes again?

Seraphina · « **Reply #23 on:** September 01, 2018, 07:15:41 PM »

Quote from: Avraham Ben Yehuda on September 01, 2018, 04:35:27 PM

When a woman is in close proximity to a man, she distracts him from everything. A man seeing the face of a woman causes carnal desire which ruins the sanctity of a church.

Wait until you see me. My ugly mug will send you running for the nearest monastery!💩

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #24 on:** September 01, 2018, 07:28:51 PM »

Even a MODESTLY dressed woman presents a challenge for a man practicing custody of the eyes.

For those with temptations against purity, the battle is won only by minute-to-minute combat, 24/7, 365, forever.

So many delicate souls, whose wills are so weakened that the thinnest temptation causes them to fall, who, coming right out of the confession into the pew, would love just 1-2 weeks respite without serious temptation, as a chance to build virtue (good habits). They look for a seat in the 2nd or 3rd row, where custody of the eyes will be easier, and concentration and devotion better, only at the last minute to have a beautiful young woman sit right in front of them, so that they must look past her to see the altar, stand behind her in Communion line, kneel besire her while receiving the Holy of Holies, and then instead of making a devout thanksgiving, scrupulously wonder if they have successfully combated all the devil's suggestions, and breath a sigh of relief when she leaves.

Most of the young men (and now women!) in the confession lines all over the world are in this sad state, to varying degrees.

But how unnecessary, if we would only heed the advice of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church in this regard!

We are being punished because we do not.

And if by the grace of God, you have for some time conquered (or never struggled with) these sins, what about your children?

The SSPX would never have the guts to be so.....traditional. The femi-trads would be outraged, and the sissified men would not withstand their strident women who wear the pants (literally).

But if men and women took it upon themselves to voluntarily segregate, there would be no issue (and those women who refused the custom would be identifying themselves to the entire chapel as feminists and liberals, which would be a deterrent for others to follow suit. Perhaps manly ushers would even direct her to a proper seat).

What is most interesting to me is that men would be WILLING AND DESIROUS to do this, but the women probably would not (even though the men are just as segregated as the women).

Maria Regina · « **Reply #25 on:** September 01, 2018, 07:49:58 PM »

Quote from: SeanJohnson on September 01, 2018, 07:28:51 PM

Even a MODESTLY dressed woman presents a challenge for a man practicing custody of the eyes.

For those with temptations against purity, the battle is won only by minute-to-minute combat, 24/7, 365, forever.

So many delicate souls, whose wills are so weakened that the thinnest temptation causes them to fall, who, coming right out of the confession into the pew, would love just 1-2 weeks respite without serious temptation, as a chance to build virtue (good habits). They look for a seat in the 2nd or 3rd row, where custody of the eyes will be easier, and concentration and devotion better, only at the last minute to have a beautiful young woman sit right in front of them, so that they must look past her to see the altar, stand behind her in Communion line, kneel besire her while receiving the Holy of Holies, and then instead of making a devout thanksgiving, scrupulously wonder if they have successfully combated all the devil's suggestions, and breath a sigh of relief when she leaves.

Most of the young men (and now women!) in the confession lines all over the world are in this sad state, to varying degrees.

But how unnecessary, if we would only heed the advice of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church in this regard!

We are being punished because we do not.

And if by the grace of God, you have for some time conquered (or never struggled with) these sins, what about your children?

The SSPX would never have the guts to be so.....traditional. The femi-trads would be outraged, and the sissified men would not withstand their strident women who wear the pants (literally).

But if men and women took it upon themselves to voluntarily segregate, there would be no issue (and those women who refused the custom would be identifying themselves to the entire chapel as feminists and liberals, which would be a deterrent for others to follow suit. Perhaps manly ushers would even direct her to a proper seat).

What is most interesting to me is that men would be WILLING AND DESIROUS to do this, but the women probably would not (even though the men are just as segregated as the women).

Custody of the senses is so very important as we must watch not only our eyes, but also our sense of smell, taste, touch, and hearing.

For example, wearing fine soft clothing can also lead to sins of lust. Putting on perfume or cologne can wound and weaken not only us but also those around us causing lustful thoughts. Eating fine foods and drinking fine wines can lead to lust. Listening to gossip while in the back of the church or even the distracting play of children in the church can lead first to distraction and then to sinful thoughts, words, and deeds. And then there are the thoughts that can trouble us like buzzing flies. We must be aware of sinful thoughts, especially those which condemn others for wearing that dress, wearing that perfume, singing off key, or daring to gossip in church.

Yes, going to church can be a temptation in itself, but if we do not go to church to receive Christ in the Eucharist, how can we be saved?

Sean Johnson, you are correct to post this warning.

Our priests need to be strong leaders who can speak with boldness urging us to be kind to one another. Be kind by taking care that we watch how we dress and behave, so that we do not tempt those around us.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #26 on:** September 01, 2018, 07:55:28 PM »

Quote from: Maria Regina on September 01, 2018, 07:49:58 PM

Custody of the senses is so very important as we must watch not only our eyes, but also our sense of smell, taste, touch, and hearing.

For example, wearing fine soft clothing can also lead to sins of lust. Putting on perfume or cologne can wound and weaken not only us but also those around us causing lustful thoughts. Eating fine foods and drinking fine wines can lead to lust. Listening to gossip while in the back of the church or even the distracting play of children in the church can lead first to distraction and then to sinful thoughts, words, and deeds. And then there are the thoughts that can trouble us like buzzing flies. We must be aware of sinful thoughts, especially those which condemn others for wearing that dress or wearing that perfume, or daring to gossip in church.

Yes, going to church can be a temptation in itself, but if we do not go to church to receive Christ in the Eucharist, how can we be saved?

Sean Johnson, you are correct to post this warning.

Our priests need to be strong leaders who can speak with boldness urging us to be kind to one another. Be kind by taking care that we watch how we dress and behave, so that we do not tempt those around us.

The Church agrees:

1917 Code of Canon Law (Canon 1262.1):

"Conformable to ancient discipline, it is desirable that the women be separarted from the men in church."

Maria Regina · « **Reply #27 on:** September 01, 2018, 08:07:39 PM »

Quote from: SeanJohnson on September 01, 2018, 07:55:28 PM

The Church agrees:

1917 Code of Canon Law (Canon 1262.1):

"Conformable to ancient discipline, it is desirable that the women be separarted from the men in church."

Are the Catholic Coptics (Eastern Catholics), the only ones who separate the men from the women?

rum · « **Reply #28 on:** September 01, 2018, 10:46:22 PM »

Quote from: SeanJohnson on September 01, 2018, 07:28:51 PM

The SSPX would never have the guts to be so.....traditional. The femi-trads would be outraged, and the sissified men would not withstand their strident women who wear the pants (literally).

But if men and women took it upon themselves to voluntarily segregate, there would be no issue (and those women who refused the custom would be identifying themselves to the entire chapel as feminists and liberals, which would be a deterrent for others to follow suit. Perhaps manly ushers would even direct her to a proper seat).

What is most interesting to me is that men would be WILLING AND DESIROUS to do this, but the women probably would not (even though the men are just as segregated as the women).

A past member here, Ethelred, told me that in German churches even as recently as the 1970s men and women sat on opposite sides of the aisle.
I suggested on another forum some years back male only and female only forums. Not subforums, but an entire forum for men and one for women. The women on the forum went ballistic and the men caved to the pressure and started attacking me as well. They were following the lead of the women.

You might be surprised with some of the people who attacked me, who have built up a reputation on this forum as very anti-feminist.

Nick · « **Reply #29 on:** September 01, 2018, 10:58:17 PM »

Those that need blindfolds should be encouraged to put them on,
and then to go and play in the traffic. Such scrupulosity makes you a serious contender for the Darwin Awards.

Author Topic: Gender segregation in church (Read 5359 times)

JezusDeKoning

Re: Gender segregation in church

Maria Regina

Re: Gender segregation in church

Geremia

1917 can. 1262

Nadir

Re: Gender segregation in church

JezusDeKoning

Re: Gender segregation in church

Avraham Ben Yehuda

Re: Gender segregation in church

SeanJohnson

Re: Gender segregation in church

Maria Regina

Re: Gender segregation in church

Seraphina

Re: Gender segregation in church

SeanJohnson

Re: Gender segregation in church

Maria Regina

Re: Gender segregation in church

SeanJohnson

Re: Gender segregation in church

Maria Regina

Re: Gender segregation in church

rum

Re: Gender segregation in church

Nick

Re: Gender segregation in church