Author Topic: Selling Out? (Read 20014 times)

Telesphorus · « **Reply #120 on:** May 12, 2012, 02:03:48 PM »

Quote from: Pepsuber

Not sure what you mean. Priests and religious are set apart and should be readily identifiable as such. Does anyone mistake a priest wearing a cassock for an imam or a Mormon missionary?

Unless those women are intentionally dressing like Muslims, Mormons, Amish, etc, to try to look like members of those sects, then it's incredibly unjust to say "they look like Muslims."

Quote

Of course not. And cassocks and religious habits are not outdated.

Except an Novus Ordite could say they are.

Whenever Trads use arguments to criticize Trad that Novus Ordites could easily use to criticize Trads in general, odds are it's a bad argument.

Quote

But someone might mistake a "traditional Catholic wife" wearing outdated attire for a Mormon or Mennonite.

Not because she's wearing something distinctively mormon or mennonite.

Wearing something old-fashioned that you don't like cannot justify saying that they are trying to ape mormons and mennonites.

Pepsuber · « **Reply #121 on:** May 14, 2012, 04:27:01 PM »

Quote from: Telesphorus

Quote from: Pepsuber
Not sure what you mean. Priests and religious are set apart and should be readily identifiable as such. Does anyone mistake a priest wearing a cassock for an imam or a Mormon missionary?

Unless those women are intentionally dressing like Muslims, Mormons, Amish, etc, to try to look like members of those sects, then it's incredibly unjust to say "they look like Muslims."

They could certainly unintentionally dress in such a way.

Quote

Whenever Trads use arguments to criticize Trad that Novus Ordites could easily use to criticize Trads in general, odds are it's a bad argument.

The difference lies in the fact that even if cassocks and traditional religious habits are out of date, they serve an actual purpose, which is to make those who have been set apart easily recognizable to the faithful. I think the wearing of the cassock is even more important today than it was 50 years ago as many Protestant clergymen have adopted the black "business suit" clericals that we once de rigeur for priests in the U.S. when they were away from their parishes (at least according to the guidelines of the Plenary Council of Baltimore).

Quote

Wearing something old-fashioned that you don't like cannot justify saying that they are trying to ape mormons and mennonites.

I didn't say anything about them trying to look like Mormons or Mennonites.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #122 on:** May 14, 2012, 05:22:46 PM »

You could just as easily say someone wearing more stylish dress is trying to dress like an atheist. Unless the dress has distinct religious connotations, they're not dressing like members of a certain religion. It's wrong of you to say that.

There's nothing wrong with women bucking modern fashions by wearing long "old-fashioned" (seems that long skirts get the brunt of resentment) clothes. There is something wrong with unduly criticizing them, comparing them to Muslims, Amish, etc, because they decisively reject offensive modern fashions.

I think the resentment expressed towards people who dress that way is really a matter that they make other Catholics feel self-conscious about their own choices.

Sigismund · « **Reply #123 on:** May 14, 2012, 07:31:13 PM »

[/quote]
Not sure what you mean. Priests and religious are set apart and should be readily identifiable as such. Does anyone mistake a priest wearing a cassock for an imam or a Mormon missionary? Of course not..[/quote]

One might mistake him for an Anglican though.... :smile:

Nadir · « **Reply #124 on:** May 15, 2012, 12:01:40 AM »

Bernadette said:
Beautiful, elegant and stylish for the day...here is a modern photo:
http://static.photaki.com/spanish-mantilla-clad-women-and-scapular_427860.jpg
How beautiful...

When these beautiful ladies are standing, one is able to see their knees. What happens when they sit? Their straight skirts start to climb higher up the leg. No doubt if they have a modicuм of modesty about them, they will be constantly tugging them back down towards their knees, instead of paying attention to the prayers/sermon of the priest. Let them keep their thighs for their husbands, not display them in the church.

Never before in history!!! I have a little knowledge of history. Never before in history would a Catholic woman expose her breasts in public. Nowadays it is par for the course. I don't think we can follow the fashions of today and still call ourselves Catholic.

Alex · « **Reply #125 on:** May 15, 2012, 02:05:52 AM »

Quote from: bernadette

The two photos I posted were not immodest...they were beautiful...Queen Isabella of Spain and another of modern Spanish women in Mantilla and wearing scapular. Both photos give the example that Catholic women have always set the proper style for the rest of society to follow.

You're kidding right?

Sorry, but a shoulderless top is immodest. It's like a tease. Almost like the woman suggesting that she is in the process of undressing.

Even the pagan world admits that shoulderless tops are sexy. Check out the dress code for schools (and we all know how liberal today's schools are and how they corrupt children, yet even they forbid such attire):

Dress appropriately. Inappropriate clothing includes:
• clothing advertising substances illegal for juveniles
• clothing containing obscene or profane language or pictures
• clothing containing gang symbols or clothing worn in a manner to identify gang membership
• sɛҳuąƖly provocative or immodest clothing (sagging pants, bare midriffs, muscle shirts, low cut tops, tops with low or open backs, tube tops, one shoulder or shoulderless tops, halter tops, short skirts/shorts); undergarments should not be visible
• hats, hair tiebacks using scarves or handkerchiefs, other headwear and jackets (windbreakers allowed with matching pants)

As for the second picture, any skirt above the knee is immodest. And wait until these women sit down. You'll be getting a wonderful view of their thighs. Yeah, real modest.

Pepsuber · « **Reply #126 on:** May 15, 2012, 07:51:48 AM »

Quote from: Telesphorus

There's nothing wrong with women bucking modern fashions by wearing long "old-fashioned" (seems that long skirts get the brunt of resentment) clothes. There is something wrong with unduly criticizing them, comparing them to Muslims, Amish, etc, because they decisively reject offensive modern fashions.

There's a difference between rejecting offensive modern fashions and wearing very outdated clothing. It's very possible to dress modestly without drawing attention to oneself by wearing something that is either out of date or is the product of a wholly different culture. I often see women wearing Muslim veils. It would be wrong for a Christian woman to dress like that and call attention to herself (at least here in the U.S., it might be quite another thing in Iraq where her life could be in danger for not dressing according to Muslim standards of "modesty"). There is no issue with long skirts in and of themselves. A long-sleeve, ankle-length dress in the height of summer could be another matter entirely.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #127 on:** May 15, 2012, 10:38:47 AM »

Quote from: Pepsuber

Quote from: Telesphorus
There's nothing wrong with women bucking modern fashions by wearing long "old-fashioned" (seems that long skirts get the brunt of resentment) clothes. There is something wrong with unduly criticizing them, comparing them to Muslims, Amish, etc, because they decisively reject offensive modern fashions.

There's a difference between rejecting offensive modern fashions and wearing very outdated clothing. It's very possible to dress modestly without drawing attention to oneself by wearing something that is either out of date or is the product of a wholly different culture. I often see women wearing Muslim veils. It would be wrong for a Christian woman to dress like that and call attention to herself (at least here in the U.S., it might be quite another thing in Iraq where her life could be in danger for not dressing according to Muslim standards of "modesty"). There is no issue with long skirts in and of themselves. A long-sleeve, ankle-length dress in the height of summer could be another matter entirely.

No, I think women are better off wearing "out of date" clothing than dressing immodestly.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #128 on:** May 15, 2012, 11:10:55 AM »

Quote from: Pepsuber

There's a difference between rejecting offensive modern fashions and wearing very outdated clothing. It's very possible to dress modestly without drawing attention to oneself by wearing something that is either out of date or is the product of a wholly different culture. I often see women wearing Muslim veils. It would be wrong for a Christian woman to dress like that and call attention to herself (at least here in the U.S., it might be quite another thing in Iraq where her life could be in danger for not dressing according to Muslim standards of "modesty"). There is no issue with long skirts in and of themselves. A long-sleeve, ankle-length dress in the height of summer could be another matter entirely.

Muslim veils differ substantially from Christian veils. Once again, it's an injustice to call it a "Muslim veil" - an insult to all Christian women who have worn veils in history, unless it really is a type of veil designed for Muslim women to wear.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #129 on:** May 15, 2012, 11:15:19 AM »

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus

No, I think women are better off wearing "out of date" clothing than dressing immodestly.

Muslim women actually do tend to practice modesty. In that respect their natural virtue puts most Christians to shame. That so many have refused to go along with liberal secular dress merits great praise.

It is similar to what St. Robert Bellarmine said about the pagans pointing to us with scorn because of the extent of drunkenness among Christians.

In the same way, modest Muslim women, Muslim women to retain their chastity before marriage, must surely point to "Christians" with scorn for the outrageous way in which they try to conform to secular liberal dress that is often immodest, often "unisex" etc.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #130 on:** May 15, 2012, 11:17:56 AM »

Quote from: Pepsuber

There is no issue with long skirts in and of themselves. A long-sleeve, ankle-length dress in the height of summer could be another matter entirely.

Sorry, but that is arrant nonsense.

There is no requirement for young women to show their ankles and go bare sleaved in a dress to satisfy your desire that they conform to the modern world.

That you try to call it "immodest" takes the cake.

It really is the same thing as liberal priests and nuns mocking traditionalists for wearing traditional habits they consider outmoded.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #131 on:** May 15, 2012, 11:39:00 AM »

Veils are Muslim?

Telesphorus · « **Reply #132 on:** May 15, 2012, 11:48:09 AM »

Traditional Catholics have their own cultural norms, this is because the general culture is in stark opposition to Catholic ways.

clare · « **Reply #133 on:** May 15, 2012, 02:37:12 PM »

Quote from: Telesphorus

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
No, I think women are better off wearing "out of date" clothing than dressing immodestly.

Muslim women actually do tend to practice modesty. In that respect their natural virtue puts most Christians to shame. That so many have refused to go along with liberal secular dress merits great praise.

And they usually wear trousers.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #134 on:** May 15, 2012, 03:01:12 PM »

Quote from: clare

And they usually wear trousers.

The people who say that Christian women wearing veils look like Muslims wouldn't say that about Christian women wearing pants, would they?

Of course Muslim women have traditionally worn trousers, but they wear a covering over them.

Christian women can distinguish themselves from Muslims by refusing to wear pants, since it's not traditional in western societies for women to wear them.