Author Topic: Modesty in dress changes with the times? (Read 4299 times)

Disputaciones · « **on:** August 31, 2015, 06:09:04 PM »

The traditionalists at pistrinaliturgica.blogspot.com say that modesty in dress changes with the times and that even Padre Pio would've eventually come to accept women wearing pants as perfectly normal and not sinful in any way.

They closed the comments right now and made them invisible so what they said can't be seen right now since they're taking a virtual break but I suppose they will be visible again when they come back.

They even said in some places women went bare legged to Mass before Vatican 2.

From what I can tell these people are old and knew how things were before, and yet what they said I would've expected it to come from those who didn't know how things were before, not from them.

If what they say is correct then I wouldn't bother with modesty myself but would dress like any other Novus Ordo since I wouldn't stand out but would be considered "normal".

shin · « **Reply #1 on:** August 31, 2015, 06:38:40 PM »

That's no traditionalist statement, that's a modernist statement.

shin · « **Reply #2 on:** August 31, 2015, 06:51:34 PM »

'And our Lord said: for that the daughters of Sion are haughty, and have walked with stretched out neck, and went with twinklings of eyes, and clapped their hands, walked on their feet, and jetted in a set pace.

Our Lord shall make bald the crown of the daughters of Sion, and our Lord shall discover their hair.

In that day shall our Lord take away the ornament of shoes, and little Moons. And chains, and ouches, and bracelets, and bonnets. And the sheading combs, and slopes, and tablets, and sweet balls, and earlets.

And rings, and pearls hanging on the forehead. And changes of apparel, and short cloaks, and the fine linen, and needles, and looking glasses, and launes, and headbands, and bonegraces. And for sweet savor there shall be stink, and for a girdle a cord, and for frissled hair baldness, and for stomachs haircloth.'

Isaiah 3:16-24

A woman who sold pants in her retail store in Vancouver went to confession in Italy to Padre Pio and was refused absolution. . .

"He commanded her to return home to Canada and dispose of all this stock, and not to give any of the items to people who might wear them, and if she wanted his absolution, she could come back to Italy and recieve it, only after she ruthlessly carried out his orders."

Padre Pio didn't die long ago. He lived in recent times.

Matto · « **Reply #3 on:** August 31, 2015, 07:49:24 PM »

It is like these people want to be damned and drag the rest of us with them.

Disputaciones · « **Reply #4 on:** August 31, 2015, 07:54:57 PM »

That very example of Padre Pio and the Canadian woman was mentioned and they still said he would've eventually come around to accept them.

They paraphrased what McHugh and Callan say in their moral theology book, which is this:

1457.(b): The obscenity of dress is largely dependent on its novelty, for things that are usual cease to excite special attention. This we can see from the fact that styles that are conservative today would have been extreme ten years ago. And so the scanty attire of hot countries, the dress of the bathing beach, and the moderate decollete tolerated in private gatherings are not obscene in their own proper times and places.

I have no idea what specifically the authors are referring to here, and maybe it doesn't even compare to what we see now, but the ones at the blog used this to justify modern clothing.

Disputaciones · « **Reply #5 on:** August 31, 2015, 07:56:45 PM »

Quote from: shin

That's no traditionalist statement, that's a modernist statement.

I didn't say their statement was traditionalist, but they.

Matto · « **Reply #6 on:** August 31, 2015, 07:58:28 PM »

Quote from: Disputaciones

That very example of Padre Pio and the Canadian woman was mentioned and they still said he would've eventually come around to accept them.

They paraphrased what McHugh and Callan say in their moral theology book, which is this:

1457.(b): The obscenity of dress is largely dependent on its novelty, for things that are usual cease to excite special attention. This we can see from the fact that styles that are conservative today would have been extreme ten years ago. And so the scanty attire of hot countries, the dress of the bathing beach, and the moderate decollete tolerated in private gatherings are not obscene in their own proper times and places.

I have no idea what specifically the authors are referring to here, and maybe it doesn't even compare to what we see now, but the ones at the blog used this to justify modern clothing.

It sounds like they are looking for excuses to sin and they find the right priests to justify their sin. Accept a quote from a moral theology book and reject the opinion of Padre Pio, the greatest saint of Modern times who has performed countless thousands of miracles. I will go with Padre Pio.

Disputaciones · « **Reply #7 on:** August 31, 2015, 08:06:21 PM »

Quote from: Matto

Quote from: Disputaciones
That very example of Padre Pio and the Canadian woman was mentioned and they still said he would've eventually come around to accept them.

They paraphrased what McHugh and Callan say in their moral theology book, which is this:

1457.(b): The obscenity of dress is largely dependent on its novelty, for things that are usual cease to excite special attention. This we can see from the fact that styles that are conservative today would have been extreme ten years ago. And so the scanty attire of hot countries, the dress of the bathing beach, and the moderate decollete tolerated in private gatherings are not obscene in their own proper times and places.

I have no idea what specifically the authors are referring to here, and maybe it doesn't even compare to what we see now, but the ones at the blog used this to justify modern clothing.

It sounds like they are looking for excuses to sin and they find the right priests to justify their sin. Accept a quote from a moral theology book and reject the opinion of Padre Pio, the greatest saint of Modern times who has performed countless thousands of miracles. I will go with Padre Pio.

Like i said we don't know what exactly the authors were referring to when they wrote that. Their book first came out in 1929 and was standard before V2. I got that from the 1958 revised version. I don't know if that was in the original first edition as well.

If that was originally written in the 1929 version then i would guess what they were referring to would be super modest compared to what's out there today. They don't even mention pants in women's dress but only dresses.

But anyways, how will somebody today know what GOD thinks about how one should dress? Not what this or that person says, but what God Himself thinks? If you're a traditionalist then you reject the Novus Ordo which has no standards and lets everyone dress however they want to dress.

Do you simply "decide for yourself" and accept that no one can impose anything on anyone right now?

Matto · « **Reply #8 on:** August 31, 2015, 08:10:26 PM »

Quote from: Disputaciones

Do you simply "decide for yourself" and accept that no one can impose anything on anyone right now?

I personally accept the advice of Padre Pio. And if I was a woman I would follow his modesty standards. Since I am a man it is much easier for me to dress modestly because there is much less social pressure on men to be immodest. Why, I don't know.

shin · « **Reply #9 on:** August 31, 2015, 08:21:05 PM »

There are all sorts of horrors in moral theology books.

Just because it's before VII, doesn't mean things were all splendid. VII wouldnt've happened if things had been splendid.

If you want to find something to rely on, go to the saints and their consensus on morals and everything.

shin · « **Reply #10 on:** August 31, 2015, 08:26:20 PM »

'Beyond fashion and its demands, there are higher and more pressing laws, principles superior to fashion, and unchangeable, which under no circuмstances can be sacrificed to the whim of pleasure or fancy, and before which must bow the fleeting omnipotence of fashion.

These principles have been proclaimed by God, by the Church, by the Saints, by reason, by Christian morality.'

Pope Pius XII

'Fashions that will greatly offend Our Lord will appear. People who follow God should not follow fashions. The Church has no fashions. Our Lord was always the same.'

Bl. Jacinta Marto of Fatima, age 9, from her last words

'We ought to make no account of an immodest person, notwithstanding that he may possess other virtues.'

St. Philip Neri

Quotations on Modesty and Purity

Disputaciones · « **Reply #11 on:** August 31, 2015, 08:41:49 PM »

Quote from: shin

There are all sorts of horrors in moral theology books.

Like what?

Quote from: shin

Just because it's before VII, doesn't mean things were all splendid. VII wouldnt've happened if things had been splendid.

But we're talking about a moral theology book which was standard for almost 30 years.

Quote from: shin

'Beyond fashion and its demands, there are higher and more pressing laws, principles superior to fashion, and unchangeable, which under no circuмstances can be sacrificed to the whim of pleasure or fancy, and before which must bow the fleeting omnipotence of fashion.

These principles have been proclaimed by God, by the Church, by the Saints, by reason, by Christian morality.'

Pope Pius XII

'Fashions that will greatly offend Our Lord will appear. People who follow God should not follow fashions. The Church has no fashions. Our Lord was always the same.'

Bl. Jacinta Marto of Fatima, age 9, from her last words

'We ought to make no account of an immodest person, notwithstanding that he may possess other virtues.'

St. Philip Neri

Quotations on Modesty and Purity

Yes i agree with all this and have read it all before, but the problem is that no standard or measurement is ever given anywhere, so how is one to know what's good and what's not?

How do you know for certain what "fashions" Our Lady was specifically referring to?

shin · « **Reply #12 on:** August 31, 2015, 08:53:45 PM »

Read the quotes in the link if you're looking for standards.

As for Callan being a "standard" you'll have to tell me, "standard" what -- there are lots of moral theology books, each differing with the other on morals, some used here, some used there.

'Standard' because it was one of the ones actually in English?

Like what you just read, and esp. regarding matters of purity.

shin · « **Reply #13 on:** August 31, 2015, 08:55:58 PM »

Moral theology books are one of the places the devil tries to justify sins in -- if he can get it in there..

Disputaciones · « **Reply #14 on:** August 31, 2015, 09:15:51 PM »

Quote from: shin

Read the quotes in the link if you're looking for standards.

The only one resembling a standard is the one from the Sacred Congregation of the Council of January 12, 1930 A.D.

Have you ever verified this? Seen the source with your won eyes? How could one find this?

Quote from: shin

As for Callan being a "standard" you'll have to tell me, "standard" what -- there are lots of moral theology books, each differing with the other on morals, some used here, some used there.

'Standard' because it was one of the ones actually in English?

Like what you just read, and esp. regarding matters of purity.

This is what the Reviser's note says:

This is a revision, not a rewriting. Various deletions and additions have been made with the intent of bringing the work up to date within the scope of the original plan and methods of the authors. In this way it has been possible to preserve the features that have made this manual a standard guide for the past thirty years.

Standard guide for 30 years it turns out.