Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Catholic Living in the Modern World => Topic started by: bowler on October 17, 2012, 05:46:45 PM
-
Is it not a mortal sin for a Catholic woman to wear short shorts in public, and to wear a bikini or one piece bathing suit at the beach?
(http://www.swimmer.com.au/files/AgonThinStrap.gif)
(replacement picture)
(http://onlineshoessale.com/images/productImages/Calvin-Klein-Jeans-Womens-Plus-Size-Flare)
Is it not a mortal sin for a woman to wear tight fitting jeans?
-
I posted a "conservative" bathing suit. There's no short shorts pictures that would be proper to post.
Here's "conservative" tight jeans picture:
(http://s0.metrouniforms.com/images/D/C50201_Sketch.jpg)
(replacement image)
-
:popcorn:
-
:popcorn:
-
Why the Hades are you posting this in this subforum?
-
Why the Hades are you posting this in this subforum?
Because it involves SSPX women who wear these clothes normally, and only dress modestly for mass. This is an SSPX issue, no?
-
Concerning it's members, not it's clergy.
This discussion is more suited to the Modern World subforum.
-
Why the Hades are you posting this in this subforum?
Because it involves SSPX women who wear these clothes normally, and only dress modestly for mass. This is an SSPX issue, no?
I don't think it would have much bearing on whether or not the SSPX makes a deal with Rome, so I'm moving it. (hint: try and post in the next minute or so and you'll likely encounter difficulties)
-
If these clothes are not appropriate for women to wear, then why is it appropriate to post pictures of women wearing these clothes?
-
If you think the dress is immodest, why did you post pictures?
As Father Chazal said, this is a matter of liberalization.
He pointed out that many of the French women think the American women are "too modest."
Now why would they be so bold to venture that in front of a priest, unless liberal priests are encouraging them in it?
When judging what is happening to the SSPX look at deeds, not words.
Sometimes they say things that give insight into what they're really thinking, but if we want to judge where they are headed, it's best to look at their deeds. Their deeds are difficult to interpret charitably, and that's an understatement.
-
If these clothes are not appropriate for women to wear, then why is it appropriate to post pictures of women wearing these clothes?
Pretty simple question, with a simple answer :smile:.
-
If these clothes are not appropriate for women to wear, then why is it appropriate to post pictures of women wearing these clothes?
Pretty simple question, with a simple answer :smile:.
I specifically posted only two "conservative" examples because I think that the vast majority of trads believe that wearing a bikini is inappropiate, but I also think that a large group might think that the clothes that I posted are ok.
I'm saying that it is a mortal sin to wear the clothes that I posted. It is a sin for the women who wear them. For the men who have to see this, well, they see it in the word every, so they are practiced in not letting it sink in.
-
For the men who have to see this, well, they see it in the word every, so they are practiced in not letting it sink in.
That may be, but in posting the pictures, you very greatly undercut your credibility. If you think it's mortally sinful to dress that way, because of the way teenage boys or the overly sensitive might react to it, then it stands to reason you'd be afraid to post pictures of it.
Women shouldn't dress that way. That's clear. That's what Trads should practice.
Arguing whether or not it's a mortal sin really shouldn't matter. Even if it were only a venial sin, they absolutely should be ashamed to dress that way.
Just as they should absolutely be ashamed of being "venially" intoxicated.
-
Most moral theologians would say stealing $5, or telling a "white lie", are venial sins.
Now I would hope all trads would be ashamed of doing those things.
-
There are guidelines for Catholic women with regard to modest clothing.
Essentially, it involves keeping to the standards of modesty that were the norm for Catholic women up until the twentieth century.
As well as the length, women need to make sure that skirts (and also other clothing) are not "figure-hugging".
In other words, the clothing should not highlight the woman's figure, but should obscure the woman's figure.
Alls this is explained in a very clear way in the link which I provided on another thread.
I advise women to print this out and take it with them when they are shopping for clothes.
Here it is again:
This link provides information for Catholic women who want to know how to dress properly:
http://www.salvemariaregina.info/Modesty.html
1. "Marylike" means modesty without compromise -- "like Mary," Christ's pure and spotless Mother.
2. Marylike dresses have sleeves extending to the wrists; and skirts reaching the ankles.
3. Marylike dresses require full and loose coverage for the bodice, chest, shoulders, and back; the cut-out about the neck must not exceed "two fingers breadth under the pit of the throat" and a similar breadth around the back of the neck.
4. Marylike dresses also do not admit as modest coverage transparent fabrics -- laces, nets, organdy, nylons, etc. -- unless sufficient backing is added. Fabrics such as laces, nets, organdy may be moderately used as trimmings only.
5. Marylike dresses avoid the improper use of flesh-colored fabrics.
6. Marylike dresses conceal rather than reveal the figure of the wearer; they do not emphasize, unduly, parts of the body.
7. Marylike dresses provide full coverage, even after jacket, cape or stole are removed.
8. Marylike fashions are designed to conceal as much of the body as possible, rather than reveal. This would automatically eliminate such fashions as slacks, jeans, shorts, culottes, tight sweaters, sheer blouses, and sleeveless dresses; etc. The Marylike standards are a guide to instil a "sense of modesty." A girl or woman who follows these, and looks up to Mary as her ideal and model, will have no problem with modesty in dress. She will not be an occasion of sin or source of embarrassment or shame to others. The standard set by the Cardinal Vicar of Pope Pius XI (quoted above) is meant to delineate between "decent" and indecent; it would be sinful to wear clothes which "cannot be called decent." We expect that members of the Fatima Crusade, who are resolved to make reparation for the sins of the world -- especially of immodest and impurity, will do far more than the minimum. They will truly strive to imitate the Blessed Virgin Mary in the virtue of modesty. Keep this guide with you when buying clothes. Make sure that you purchase or make only garments which meet the Marylike Standards.
"Be Marylike by being modest -- be modest by being Marylike."
There are places where you can buy entirely modest, yet also nice looking clothes.
I intend to post a list of these places on CathInfo.
-
If these clothes are not appropriate for women to wear, then why is it appropriate to post pictures of women wearing these clothes?
Pretty simple question, with a simple answer :smile:.
I specifically posted only two "conservative" examples because I think that the vast majority of trads believe that wearing a bikini is inappropiate, but I also think that a large group might think that the clothes that I posted are ok.
I'm saying that it is a mortal sin to wear the clothes that I posted. It is a sin for the women who wear them. For the men who have to see this, well, they see it in the word every, so they are practiced in not letting it sink in.
I replaced the picture for you. It's not much better, but there's not an actual person in the picture anymore. I hope it's equivalent enough.
-
Dear Mater,
Thank you for doing that.
We do need need to make sure that, at least on CathInfo, there is a high moral standard.
God Bless you, Mater.
-
Dear Bowler,
Yes, I agree with you.
A woman who wear a swimsuit or shorts or pants or any immodest clothing, is sinning.
God Bless you, Bowler.
-
Dear Mater,
Thank you for doing that.
We do need need to make sure that, at least on CathInfo, there is a high moral standard.
God Bless you, Mater.
This.
-
There are guidelines for Catholic women with regard to modest clothing.
Essentially, it involves keeping to the standards of modesty that were the norm for Catholic women up until the twentieth century.
As well as the length, women need to make sure that skirts (and also other clothing) are not "figure-hugging".
In other words, the clothing should not highlight the woman's figure, but should obscure the woman's figure.
Alls this is explained in a very clear way in the link which I provided on another thread.
I advise women to print this out and take it with them when they are shopping for clothes.
Here it is again:
This link provides information for Catholic women who want to know how to dress properly:
http://www.salvemariaregina.info/Modesty.html
1. "Marylike" means modesty without compromise -- "like Mary," Christ's pure and spotless Mother.
2. Marylike dresses have sleeves extending to the wrists; and skirts reaching the ankles.
3. Marylike dresses require full and loose coverage for the bodice, chest, shoulders, and back; the cut-out about the neck must not exceed "two fingers breadth under the pit of the throat" and a similar breadth around the back of the neck.
4. Marylike dresses also do not admit as modest coverage transparent fabrics -- laces, nets, organdy, nylons, etc. -- unless sufficient backing is added. Fabrics such as laces, nets, organdy may be moderately used as trimmings only.
5. Marylike dresses avoid the improper use of flesh-colored fabrics.
6. Marylike dresses conceal rather than reveal the figure of the wearer; they do not emphasize, unduly, parts of the body.
7. Marylike dresses provide full coverage, even after jacket, cape or stole are removed.
8. Marylike fashions are designed to conceal as much of the body as possible, rather than reveal. This would automatically eliminate such fashions as slacks, jeans, shorts, culottes, tight sweaters, sheer blouses, and sleeveless dresses; etc. The Marylike standards are a guide to instil a "sense of modesty." A girl or woman who follows these, and looks up to Mary as her ideal and model, will have no problem with modesty in dress. She will not be an occasion of sin or source of embarrassment or shame to others. The standard set by the Cardinal Vicar of Pope Pius XI (quoted above) is meant to delineate between "decent" and indecent; it would be sinful to wear clothes which "cannot be called decent." We expect that members of the Fatima Crusade, who are resolved to make reparation for the sins of the world -- especially of immodest and impurity, will do far more than the minimum. They will truly strive to imitate the Blessed Virgin Mary in the virtue of modesty. Keep this guide with you when buying clothes. Make sure that you purchase or make only garments which meet the Marylike Standards.
"Be Marylike by being modest -- be modest by being Marylike."
There are places where you can buy entirely modest, yet also nice looking clothes.
I intend to post a list of these places on CathInfo.
Except for some elderly ladies, no women at our chapel abide by these standards.
-
:sign-surrender:
-
Arguing whether or not it's a mortal sin really shouldn't matter. Even if it were only a venial sin, they absolutely should be ashamed to dress that way.
Arguing that it's a mortal sin very much matters, for if it is, which I believe it is, and the person dies in an sudden accident, they will not be saved. One mortal sin can damn a person. The discussion is very important and does matter.
I notice that the tight jeans picture was not also replaced, why not?
-
Is it not a mortal sin for a Catholic woman to wear short shorts in public, and to wear a bikini or one piece bathing suit at the beach?
(http://www.swimmer.com.au/files/AgonThinStrap.gif)
(replacement picture)
(http://onlineshoessale.com/images/productImages/Calvin-Klein-Jeans-Womens-Plus-Size-Flare)
Is it not a mortal sin for a woman to wear tight fitting jeans?
Women who wear bikinis are not trad. They may call themselves Trad, but I call myself Casonovva. In fact they are not women but whores, at least in appearance.
There are many "trads" who are so only for an hour on Sunday.
Same with those who wear jeans or anything besides skirts to their ankles and tops that cover their chest and arms, tight or see through.
Tell them to stop.
What is the purpose of getting people to lust after you. Didn't get enough attention from your dad? Are you a tease or a whore? Can't figure out what else it would be.
God help us all.
-
I once heard a recording of an elderly lady calling in to a radio station.
She said, "With today's dress standards, I can't tell who the hookers are."
Sad but true.
Catholics need to become more active in the clothing industry. That way, there would be choices for people.
A lot of times, you'll see a young woman wearing tight jeans and a loose top. If you watch, (and I'm not suggesting anything untoward) but you will notice many times her hands pull down on her short to cover her bottom. Even though this activity generally achieves very little in modesty, I am inclined to believe at least subconsciously, that that young woman may buy more modest clothes if they were available.
I'm not excusing anything due to availability because modesty is mostly smirked at in the non-trad communities.
-
The chapels need to start forming classes with local sewing instructors and so the teen girls and women learn how to sew apparel. The priest need to encourage this/prop it up some as far as women spending time on this until it becomes part of our lifestyle. Not every women needs to become proficient at things like adjusting patterns but she should have the basics down of cutting & sewing a dress from a pattern. I do not think we are going to see all women in a chapel dressing modestly until chapels each have at least a couple of women or teen girls that can sew for the others.
-
The next dress or two my wife buys will be made by Muslims. I'm serious. She found the site and showed me and asked what I thought. I said I thought it looked great.
Have you seen the modern muslims that still dress modest on top and even wear the head cover but wear jeans at the bottom? What will one of these think when my wife walks buy in a muslim style dress?
-
I'm saying that it is a mortal sin to wear the clothes that I posted. It is a sin for the women who wear them. For the men who have to see this, well, they see it in the word every, so they are practiced in not letting it sink in.
This sort of reasoning often lies behind women dressing immodestly. They think that men see this all the time and so it won't bother them. Your bad example here could actually encourage women to be immodest. Scolding women about what we should wear is not going to do much good if you undermine it with your words and actions.
-
I notice that the tight jeans picture was not also replaced, why not?
I couldn't quickly find an acceptable replacement. I found one, but it looked even tighter (on the non-person) than the one you posted! A bit like paint, actually. : ) Perhaps I'll look again and see what I can find...
-
I would never buy a Muslim dress. Their idea of modesty is nothing to do with Mary-like purity, and I wouldn't give them a plugged nickel anyway.
-
Scolding women about what we should wear is not going to do much good if you undermine it with your words and actions.
I said that wearing those clothes is a mortal sin. I said that if someone dies by accident, and has one mortal sin on their soul, that they will not be saved.
I think that what I said is analogous to be telling the lemmings that they are stampeding to the edge of a deadly cliff. Do you find that to be "scolding".
-
I said that wearing those clothes is a mortal sin. I said that if someone dies by accident, and has one mortal sin on their soul, that they will not be saved.
One of the conditions which make a sin mortal: it must be committed with full knowledge, both of the sin and of the gravity of the offense.
-
Scolding women about what we should wear is not going to do much good if you undermine it with your words and actions.
I said that wearing those clothes is a mortal sin. I said that if someone dies by accident, and has one mortal sin on their soul, that they will not be saved.
I think that what I said is analogous to be telling the lemmings that they are stampeding to the edge of a deadly cliff. Do you find that to be "scolding".
Perhaps "warning" would be a better word than "scolding". However, I doubt that you were warning the women who need it. I find it unlikely that the women who read CathInfo wear tight jeans or bikinis. I certainly don't.
At any rate, my point is that posting those pictures and then trying to justify posting those pictures is undermining the message of the importance of modesty.
-
The next dress or two my wife buys will be made by Muslims. I'm serious. She found the site and showed me and asked what I thought. I said I thought it looked great.
Have you seen the modern muslims that still dress modest on top and even wear the head cover but wear jeans at the bottom? What will one of these think when my wife walks buy in a muslim style dress?
LOT, is your wife buying her dresses online? If she is, could you share the website/s? After much praying and speaking with my priest I have chosen to cover my head as Our Blessed Mother did and have done so for a little over two years. I find wearing under caps make my scarfs not slide off my head so easily and I can only find them on Muslim clothing sites. I could use some new ones and have lost all my clothing bookmarks after catching a nasty computer bug. One nice thing about Muslim women's tops/shirts are they are long tunic styles. They are most modest indeed. I know Elizabeth doesn't wish to buy anything from Muslims, but how many clothing items do we buy from Buddhists in China? I would gladly buy from Trad Catholic sites if anyone could direct me to some that are reasonably priced so that I didn't have to take a second mortgage out on my house in order to by a few new items.
-
I find it unlikely that the women who read CathInfo wear tight jeans or bikinis. I certainly don't.
There could be some, certainly the jeans part. My discussion is about establishing a principle. If a trad women told you that outside of Sundays at mass, she wears, shorts, one piece bathing suit, tight jeans etc. , and asks you why you do not wear them, what would you say?
If you said that you don't wear them because it would be a mortal sin for you to induce men to the sin of lust. Don't you think that would strike a cord? Or would you just say that it would be immodest for you to wear those clothes (the typical lame answer)?
-
I said that wearing those clothes is a mortal sin. I said that if someone dies by accident, and has one mortal sin on their soul, that they will not be saved.
One of the conditions which make a sin mortal: it must be committed with full knowledge, both of the sin and of the gravity of the offense.
That simple quote has been used for over 50 years to excuse everybody from practically every sin (except Adolph Hitler of course).
That whatever is done through ignorance must not be considered a sin, is hereby condemned as error. Pope Innocent II
It does not suffice to say: "If I had known that such a thing were forbidden by the law of God, I would have conformed." St. Paul, in persecuting Christians, previous to his conversion, did not think that he was committing evil; the same may be said of Jews who persecuted and crucified Christ. And yet, Saint Paul and these Jews were not innocent and excusable. If they had died in that state, they would never have been saved. Hence, St. Paul, despite the good faith he acted on, acknowledges that he was at that time a blasphemer, and unjust: a persecutor of the Church. If, therefore, a person be ignorant of what is commanded¬ or forbidden because he has not studied the law of God, his ignorance does not excuse him from sin. St. Alphonsus Maria Liguori
If ignorance is not a sin, then Saul did not sin when he persecuted the Church, because he surely did this in ignorance. Therefore, he should not have said: “I obtained the mercy of God” (I Tim 1:13), but rather “I received my reward”. St. Bernard
Those who keep their eyes shut cannot see. God made you without your knowledge, but He does not justify you without your willing it. Refusal to hear the truth leads to sin, and that sin itself is punishment for the preceding sin. Every sinner is inexcusable whether he knows it or not. For ignorance itself, in those who do not want to know, is without doubt a sin; and, in those unable to know, is the penalty of sin. In neither case, then, is there a just excuse, but in both cases there is a just condemnation. St. Augustine
It follows that ignorance has the nature of mortal sin on account of either a preceding negligence, or the consequent result; and, for this reason, ignorance is reckoned one of the general causes of sin. All sin proceeds from ignorance. St. Thomas Aquinas
Unbelief has the character of guilt from resisting the faith, rather than from mere absence of the faith. St Thomas Aquinas
Innumerable souls are miserably lost through ignorance of religion the source of every other calamity. St Frances Xavier Cabrini
Reflect on the ruin of souls wrought by this single cause: ignorance of truths which must be known by all men alike in order that they may attain eternal salvation. This we solemnly affirm: the majority of those condemned to eternal Punishment fall into everlasting misfortune through ignorance of the Mysteries of the faith, which must necessarily be known and believed by all who belong to the Elect. Pope St. Pius X
The excuse of ignorance is denied those who know the commandments of God, but neither will those who do not know be without punishment. "For, as many as have sinned outside the law shall also perish outside the law" (Romans 2:12). Without faith in Christ, no man can be delivered; therefore, they will be judged in such a way that they perish. "The ser¬vant who does not know his Lord's will, and who commits things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes , whereas, the servant who knows his Lord's will, shall be beaten with many stripes" (Lk. 12:47 48). Observe here that it is a more serious matter for a man to sin with knowledge than in ignorance. And yet, we must not take refuge on this account to shades of ignorance, to find our excuse therein. Even ignorance which belongs to them who are, as it were, simply ignorant does not excuse any¬ one so as to exempt him from eternal fire, even were his failure to believe the result of not having heard at all what he should believe. It was not said with¬ out reason: "Pour out Thy wrath upon the nations who have not known Thee" (Psalm 78:6), and "He shall come from Heaven in a flame of fire to take vengeance on those who do not know God" (Thess.11 1:7 8) St. Augustine
Perhaps he who asserts that a person cannot sin through ignorance never prays for his ignorances, but laughs at the prophet who prays: "O Lord, remember not the sins of my ignorances!" (Ps. 24:7). Perhaps he even reproves God, Who requires satisfaction for the sin of ignorance, for in Leviticus He speaks of "sin through ignorance." If ignorance were never a sin, why is it that the High Priest entered the second tabernacle with blood, which he offered "for his own ignorance and for the ignorance of the people" (Heb. 9:7)? If one never sins through ignorance, then what do we hold against those who killed the Apostles, since they truly did not know that to kill them was evil but rather thought that they were "doing a service to God" (Jn. 16:2). Thus, also, Our Sa-vior prayed in vain on the cross for those who cruci¬fied Him since, as He Himself testifies, they were ig¬norant of what they were doing (Lk. 23:34) and thus they did not sin at all! Neither should anyone suspect that the Apostle could have lied when he said: "For, if they had known it, they would never have crucified the Lord" (I Corinth. 2:8). Is it not sufficiently clear, from these passages, in what great ignorance the man lies who does not know that one can some¬ times sin through ignorance? St. Bernard
-
I find it unlikely that the women who read CathInfo wear tight jeans or bikinis. I certainly don't.
There could be some, certainly the jeans part. My discussion is about establishing a principle. If a trad women told you that outside of Sundays at mass, she wears, shorts, one piece bathing suit, tight jeans etc. , and asks you why you do not wear them, what would you say?
If you said that you don't wear them because it would be a mortal sin for you to induce men to the sin of lust. Don't you think that would strike a cord? Or would you just say that it would be immodest for you to wear those clothes (the typical lame answer)?
I am a grandmother. I am not likely to induce men to the sin of lust no matter what I wear.
-
Everyone knows I usually don't obsess over modesty but yes bikinis are immoral for any descent woman, she even doesn't have to be Catholic.
-
I find it unlikely that the women who read CathInfo wear tight jeans or bikinis. I certainly don't.
There could be some, certainly the jeans part. My discussion is about establishing a principle. If a trad women told you that outside of Sundays at mass, she wears, shorts, one piece bathing suit, tight jeans etc. , and asks you why you do not wear them, what would you say?
If you said that you don't wear them because it would be a mortal sin for you to induce men to the sin of lust. Don't you think that would strike a cord? Or would you just say that it would be immodest for you to wear those clothes (the typical lame answer)?
I am a grandmother. I am not likely to induce men to the sin of lust no matter what I wear.
This discussion is not about us. By the way though, even a grandmother can be a bad dressing example for others who can induce men to lust. I've seen grandmothers at our chapel wearing tight knit tops, that would be very a big problem for men if worn by young girls. In fact, the young girls wear them all the time at the chapel, and what can you say to them, when the adults are wearing them? Anyhow, our priests are oblivious to all of this, or more likely, they have been instructed not to touch the subject by Menzingen.
-
This discussion is not about us. By the way though, even a grandmother can be a bad dressing example for others who can induce men to lust. I've seen grandmothers at our chapel wearing tight knit tops, that would be very a big problem for men if worn by young girls. In fact, the young girls wear them all the time at the chapel, and what can you say to them, when the adults are wearing them? Anyhow, our priests are oblivious to all of this, or more likely, they have been instructed not to touch the subject by Menzingen.
An unfortunate circuмstance which I've noticed is that even the younger girls will occasionally wear dresses. All of the older women I've seen just wear jeans or pants around everywhere.
-
I find it unlikely that the women who read CathInfo wear tight jeans or bikinis. I certainly don't.
There could be some, certainly the jeans part. My discussion is about establishing a principle. If a trad women told you that outside of Sundays at mass, she wears, shorts, one piece bathing suit, tight jeans etc. , and asks you why you do not wear them, what would you say?
If you said that you don't wear them because it would be a mortal sin for you to induce men to the sin of lust. Don't you think that would strike a cord? Or would you just say that it would be immodest for you to wear those clothes (the typical lame answer)?
I am a grandmother. I am not likely to induce men to the sin of lust no matter what I wear.
This discussion is not about us. By the way though, even a grandmother can be a bad dressing example for others who can induce men to lust. I've seen grandmothers at our chapel wearing tight knit tops, that would be very a big problem for men if worn by young girls. In fact, the young girls wear them all the time at the chapel, and what can you say to them, when the adults are wearing them? Anyhow, our priests are oblivious to all of this, or more likely, they have been instructed not to touch the subject by Menzingen.
You are not explaining it very well so it makes sense that a priest would discourage you from discussing this subject. You probably should leave it to others.
-
An unfortunate circuмstance which I've noticed is that even the younger girls will occasionally wear dresses. All of the older women I've seen just wear jeans or pants around everywhere.
I am an older woman and I almost always wear dresses/skirts. I wear pants to exercise.
-
The next dress or two my wife buys will be made by Muslims. I'm serious. She found the site and showed me and asked what I thought. I said I thought it looked great.
Have you seen the modern muslims that still dress modest on top and even wear the head cover but wear jeans at the bottom? What will one of these think when my wife walks buy in a muslim style dress?
LOT, is your wife buying her dresses online? If she is, could you share the website/s? After much praying and speaking with my priest I have chosen to cover my head as Our Blessed Mother did and have done so for a little over two years. I find wearing under caps make my scarfs not slide off my head so easily and I can only find them on Muslim clothing sites. I could use some new ones and have lost all my clothing bookmarks after catching a nasty computer bug. One nice thing about Muslim women's tops/shirts are they are long tunic styles. They are most modest indeed. I know Elizabeth doesn't wish to buy anything from Muslims, but how many clothing items do we buy from Buddhists in China? I would gladly buy from Trad Catholic sites if anyone could direct me to some that are reasonably priced so that I didn't have to take a second mortgage out on my house in order to by a few new items.
The heretical Muslim female religious headgear is entirely different than, say, pita bread baked by a Muslim. The female clothing has a distinct Muslim purpose and meaning; the Muslim sect is an heretical Christian one. So, I will buy pita bread if necessary from Muslims, the same as I get chicken from the Amish. But I would not buy an Amish or Mennonite head covering and tell myself I am being Mary-like. I would suggest having a look at a Catholic women's religious clothing catalogue-probably Italian-or speak to a Catholic nun about how to cover your head as Our Blessed Mother did. I'll see if I can find a resource for you.
I don't know of any Trads who buy Buddhist robes, for example, in order to be Mary-like. Where your argument would work is if we Trads buy Chinese Budddhist head gear or robes for modesty.
I never buy devotional items made in China; much of what I buy is from the thrift store; the label says, 'Made in U.S.A.' Orvis has beautiful, long skirts made in the US. They are crafted to last a lifetime and worth every penny.
But your desire to imitate Our Lady is a beautiful thing :pray: :pray: :pray:--sorry I am reactionary about Mormons and Muslims. (worse about Mormons)
-
I find it unlikely that the women who read CathInfo wear tight jeans or bikinis. I certainly don't.
There could be some, certainly the jeans part. My discussion is about establishing a principle. If a trad women told you that outside of Sundays at mass, she wears, shorts, one piece bathing suit, tight jeans etc. , and asks you why you do not wear them, what would you say?
If you said that you don't wear them because it would be a mortal sin for you to induce men to the sin of lust. Don't you think that would strike a cord? Or would you just say that it would be immodest for you to wear those clothes (the typical lame answer)?
I am a grandmother. I am not likely to induce men to the sin of lust no matter what I wear.
This discussion is not about us. By the way though, even a grandmother can be a bad dressing example for others who can induce men to lust. I've seen grandmothers at our chapel wearing tight knit tops, that would be very a big problem for men if worn by young girls. In fact, the young girls wear them all the time at the chapel, and what can you say to them, when the adults are wearing them? Anyhow, our priests are oblivious to all of this, or more likely, they have been instructed not to touch the subject by Menzingen.
You are not explaining it very well so it makes sense that a priest would discourage you from discussing this subject. You probably should leave it to others.
Where did i say that priests discouraged me from discussing this subject? I said that:
"In fact, the young girls wear them all the time at the chapel, and what can you say to them, when the adults are wearing them? Anyhow, our priests are oblivious to all of this, or more likely, they have been instructed not to touch the subject by Menzingen."
I believe that the Novus SSPX like the Novus Ordo, does not want to touch the subject. They are cowards.
By the way, I have never told a female parishioner to dress differently. That's a priests job. If it is a mortal sin as I said, then the priests are allowing it to happen.
Among adults there are few saved because of the sins of the flesh....With exception of those who die in childhood, most men will be damned. (St. Remigius of Rheims)
-
First I would like to thank bowler for all the great quotes from the saints about how ignorance excuses no one from the guilt of sin. However, I think that you have to understand these quotes in their proper context.
It would seem that they were speaking of mortal sin. Since the natural law (conscience) is written upon the hearts of all men, even a pagan who has never heard of Jesus or the Gospel who commits a grave sin such wilful murder, his conscience accuses him. He instinctively knows in his heart that he has committed a great evil.
I notice you've included some quotes from St. Augustine. Wasn't it he who under the guidance of the Holy Ghost formulated the three conditions that constitute a mortal sin?
Now in light of all I've said I believe, Faber is correct. Most young girls who dress immodestly have been so conditioned by the decadent culture in which we live and have most likely never received proper catechesis are oblivious to matters of modesty. That's not to say that to dress immodestly in the extreme isn't a conscious decision on their part and in such a case they would be guilty of mortal sin. However, I'm guessing that most of these girls who dress in tight jeans etc., are just following the latest fads and want to fit in.
-
I once heard a recording of an elderly lady calling in to a radio station.
She said, "With today's dress standards, I can't tell who the hookers are."
Sad but true.
Catholics need to become more active in the clothing industry. That way, there would be choices for people.
A lot of times, you'll see a young woman wearing tight jeans and a loose top. If you watch, (and I'm not suggesting anything untoward) but you will notice many times her hands pull down on her short to cover her bottom. Even though this activity generally achieves very little in modesty, I am inclined to believe at least subconsciously, that that young woman may buy more modest clothes if they were available.
I'm not excusing anything due to availability because modesty is mostly smirked at in the non-trad communities.
They are the ones who are charging.
-
I believe that the Novus SSPX like the Novus Ordo, does not want to touch the subject. They are cowards.
Maybe they are just liberals?
Some are probably cowed by their superiors.
-
Besides the priests, what happened to the grandmothers that had no problem throwing a shawl on their granddaughter or any of her friends before walking out the door or before walking into the church building. I used to think of them as "h***y shawls" because that is the word I would hear. :laugh1:
-
I said that wearing those clothes is a mortal sin. I said that if someone dies by accident, and has one mortal sin on their soul, that they will not be saved.
One of the conditions which make a sin mortal: it must be committed with full knowledge, both of the sin and of the gravity of the offense.
That simple quote has been used for over 50 years to excuse everybody from practically every sin (except Adolph Hitler of course).
bowler, I did not excuse anybody.
What you said, is simply not true, and I told you so.
Merely wearing tight jeans may not even be a grave sin.
You have been corrected by some users, now get yourself a good, traditional Catechism, study the classifications of sin, and stop spreading false ideas about sin.
It's a good idea to talk about the importance of modest clothing, but without distorting the teaching of the Church, please.
-
There are guidelines for Catholic women with regard to modest clothing.
Essentially, it involves keeping to the standards of modesty that were the norm for Catholic women up until the twentieth century.
As well as the length, women need to make sure that skirts (and also other clothing) are not "figure-hugging".
In other words, the clothing should not highlight the woman's figure, but should obscure the woman's figure.
Alls this is explained in a very clear way in the link which I provided on another thread.
I advise women to print this out and take it with them when they are shopping for clothes.
Here it is again:
This link provides information for Catholic women who want to know how to dress properly:
http://www.salvemariaregina.info/Modesty.html
1. "Marylike" means modesty without compromise -- "like Mary," Christ's pure and spotless Mother.
2. Marylike dresses have sleeves extending to the wrists; and skirts reaching the ankles.
3. Marylike dresses require full and loose coverage for the bodice, chest, shoulders, and back; the cut-out about the neck must not exceed "two fingers breadth under the pit of the throat" and a similar breadth around the back of the neck.
4. Marylike dresses also do not admit as modest coverage transparent fabrics -- laces, nets, organdy, nylons, etc. -- unless sufficient backing is added. Fabrics such as laces, nets, organdy may be moderately used as trimmings only.
5. Marylike dresses avoid the improper use of flesh-colored fabrics.
6. Marylike dresses conceal rather than reveal the figure of the wearer; they do not emphasize, unduly, parts of the body.
7. Marylike dresses provide full coverage, even after jacket, cape or stole are removed.
8. Marylike fashions are designed to conceal as much of the body as possible, rather than reveal. This would automatically eliminate such fashions as slacks, jeans, shorts, culottes, tight sweaters, sheer blouses, and sleeveless dresses; etc. The Marylike standards are a guide to instil a "sense of modesty." A girl or woman who follows these, and looks up to Mary as her ideal and model, will have no problem with modesty in dress. She will not be an occasion of sin or source of embarrassment or shame to others. The standard set by the Cardinal Vicar of Pope Pius XI (quoted above) is meant to delineate between "decent" and indecent; it would be sinful to wear clothes which "cannot be called decent." We expect that members of the Fatima Crusade, who are resolved to make reparation for the sins of the world -- especially of immodest and impurity, will do far more than the minimum. They will truly strive to imitate the Blessed Virgin Mary in the virtue of modesty. Keep this guide with you when buying clothes. Make sure that you purchase or make only garments which meet the Marylike Standards.
"Be Marylike by being modest -- be modest by being Marylike."
There are places where you can buy entirely modest, yet also nice looking clothes.
I intend to post a list of these places on CathInfo.
Except for some elderly ladies, no women at our chapel abide by these standards.
Yes,
I understand that lamentable situation.
If traditional Catholics who support these guidelines inform those who do not know about them, then hopefully traditional Catholic women will start to dress as they should.
-
Yes,
I understand that lamentable situation.
If traditional Catholics who support these guidelines inform those who do not know about them, then hopefully traditional Catholic women will start to dress as they should.
Well here is a question. If there is a moral government cannot the State enforce the guidelines of dress on women?
-
Yes, a moral government certainly should.
-
But also in a proper Catholic country, the ordinary people would be so scandalized by immodest dress that it would not be tolerated anyway.
-
A sense of modesty in our girls (and boys) should be instilled in them long before they know about things like lust and the birds and the bees.
This is one thing I don't understood with all the "modesty talk"and teen girls they seem to focus so much on telling them about men I think some of that is inappropriate and it's definitely wrong to have them dwelling on it so much. I think it's silly too, if a beautiful woman is in a paper bag, she is going to turn heads. A woman could be covered from head to toe in surgical garb with only her eyes showing and men will hit on her.
There is a movie called Cranford and the spinster older sister, she is a good example of a character that has a high standard of modesty while never mentioning things like men's lust but still having an awareness and high standard.
-
I usually wear dresses that are mid-calf length rather than reaching my ankles. In the summer, I sometimes wear tops that expose my elbows. Am I understanding correctly that some here are saying that I am going to hell for this?
-
I usually wear dresses that are mid-calf length rather than reaching my ankles. In the summer, I sometimes wear tops that expose my elbows. Am I understanding correctly that some here are saying that I am going to hell for this?
Do you have quotes to support that accusation Jayne? I think you shouldn't argue someone is making such a claim without supporting quotations.
-
I usually wear dresses that are mid-calf length rather than reaching my ankles. In the summer, I sometimes wear tops that expose my elbows. Am I understanding correctly that some here are saying that I am going to hell for this?
Do you have quotes to support that accusation Jayne? I think you shouldn't argue someone is making such a claim without supporting quotations.
At least one person is saying that wearing immodest clothes is a mortal sin. Others are saying that the standard for modesty includes long sleeves and ankle-length skirts. Putting it together, I would be going to hell for the way I dress. I'm not accusing anyone. I'm just asking if anyone actually believes that.
-
At least one person is saying that wearing immodest clothes is a mortal sin.
It certainly can be.
Others are saying that the standard for modesty includes long sleeves and ankle-length skirts.
That's what he considers ideal.
Putting it together, I would be going to hell for the way I dress. I'm not accusing anyone. I'm just asking if anyone actually believes that.
You shouldn't claim someone is saying you'll go to hell for the way you dress based on the "deduction" you made from those two statements.
-
Sede often speaks of Victorian style of modesty, Victoria reigned for a long time, but he speaks of covering to the neck, ankles and wrists. What inspired that dress? Did she convert to Catholicism? I do cover to my wrists when outside the home, except while swimming, I'm just curious how the styles then = Catholic modesty. I'm ignorant of that period of dress except for movies (and we know how accurate Hollywood is :laugh1: ) and it seems like at least the formal dresses were tight in the upper body.
-
Putting it together, I would be going to hell for the way I dress. I'm not accusing anyone. I'm just asking if anyone actually believes that.
You shouldn't claim someone is saying you'll go to hell for the way you dress based on the "deduction" you made from those two statements.
I'm not claiming it. I'm asking for clarification.
-
Sede often speaks of Victorian style of modesty, Victoria reigned for a long time, but he speaks of covering to the neck, ankles and wrists. What inspired that dress? Did she convert to Catholicism? I do cover to my wrists when outside the home, except while swimming, I'm just curious how the styles then = Catholic modesty. I'm ignorant of that period of dress except for movies (and we know how accurate Hollywood is :laugh1: ) and it seems like at least the formal dresses were tight in the upper body.
It's not the fact that Queen Victoria that defines the time period, though she was given credit for good manners.
Public morality was in high regard at that time, compared to other times.
I recommend you read the pertinent parts of Robert Mackenzie's The Nineteenth Century.
The Nineteenth Century (http://books.google.com/books?id=RkU2AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA94&lpg=PA94&dq=ladies+swore+orally+and+in+letters&source=bl&ots=mRtiZCn3jL&sig=MMpp89g__h0aaSpSaI2_GDcUqqk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=xLuCUJP8HqfV0QGZ14D4Cg&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=ladies%20swore%20orally%20and%20in%20letters&f=false)
He doesn't mention clothing because changes in clothing were perhaps less noticeable and drastic.
Tolstoy, however, did make a point of the immodesty of Empire style dress.
-
I usually wear dresses that are mid-calf length rather than reaching my ankles. In the summer, I sometimes wear tops that expose my elbows. Am I understanding correctly that some here are saying that I am going to hell for this?
Jaynek,
I think you're supposed to wear 3/4 length sleeves on blouses. Good luck finding them. I've come across a few in second hand stores, but I don't believe I've ever seen any in a department store. I guess your only other option is to roll up a long sleeve shirt until the sleeves are just below the the elbows. But IMHO, I don't think that God will sent you to hell for having you're elbows showing on a 90 degree day.
-
I think the solution is to leave the line between venial and mortal sin to the moral theologians and to recognize that venially sinful dress should be unacceptable. And the virtue of decorum, without scrupulosity or ostentatious frumpiness, should be the goal.
-
It would be mortally sinful to dress in a way calculated to inflame venereal passions.
Those who design the clothes are the ones doing the calculating, and the way they have the clothes modeled says it all about the intentions.
-
Sede often speaks of Victorian style of modesty, Victoria reigned for a long time, but he speaks of covering to the neck, ankles and wrists. What inspired that dress? Did she convert to Catholicism? I do cover to my wrists when outside the home, except while swimming, I'm just curious how the styles then = Catholic modesty. I'm ignorant of that period of dress except for movies (and we know how accurate Hollywood is :laugh1: ) and it seems like at least the formal dresses were tight in the upper body.
Yes, formal dresses were low-cut and short-sleeved. There is a picture of young Queen Victoria wearing a dress with a neckline that shows her shoulders and goes well below her collarbone.
-
It would be mortally sinful to dress in a way calculated to inflame venereal passions.
That's what I was saying.
Wouldn't it be more striking to say that to a girl, than to say that they shouldn't dress a certain way because it is immodest?
As an aside, a priest once told a mother that her daughters should not dress to attract men, unless they are of age to get married.
-
I think the solution is to leave the line between venial and mortal sin to the moral theologians and to recognize that venially sinful dress should be unacceptable. And the virtue of decorum, without scrupulosity or ostentatious frumpiness, should be the goal.
I agree. Getting into a debate over mortal or venial sin just serves as a distraction from the importance of modesty.
I think that example is far more influential than what we say, anyhow. When some women dress modestly and attractively, it helps other women to see a model of how things should be. Catholic women (and their husbands or fathers) should be thinking about women's clothing in terms of demonstrating godly standards.
-
I said that wearing those clothes is a mortal sin. I said that if someone dies by accident, and has one mortal sin on their soul, that they will not be saved.
One of the conditions which make a sin mortal: it must be committed with full knowledge, both of the sin and of the gravity of the offense.
That simple quote has been used for over 50 years to excuse everybody from practically every sin (except Adolph Hitler of course).
bowler, I did not excuse anybody.
What you said, is simply not true, and I told you so.
Merely wearing tight jeans may not even be a grave sin.
You have been corrected by some users, now get yourself a good, traditional Catechism, study the classifications of sin, and stop spreading false ideas about sin.
It's a good idea to talk about the importance of modest clothing, but without distorting the teaching of the Church, please.
You are saying, if they don't know it's a mortal sin, it is not a mortal sin. Your point is moot, it is irrelevent. Read the saints quotes I gave you. That's the Church speaking, and they all knew what you wrote.
If they don't know it is a sin, then they will know when they are told, which is what we (parents, priests, respected elders) are going to be doing, right? End of excuse.
End of story.
-
As an aside, a priest once told a mother that her daughters should not dress to attract men, unless they are of age to get married.
Age 16 is old enough to start accepting suitors.
-
It would be mortally sinful to dress in a way calculated to inflame venereal passions.
That's what I was saying.
Wouldn't it be more striking to say that to a girl, than to say that they shouldn't dress a certain way because it is immodest?
No, because some girls just wear clothes that are in fashion in order to fit in and aren't thinking about men's passion. These girls still need to dress modestly and it is not good to teach them to think very much about men's passion.
-
As an aside, a priest once told a mother that her daughters should not dress to attract men, unless they are of age to get married.
Age 16 is old enough to start accepting suitors.
As you know, the law says differently. And, well, if the parents don't want that, they better not let them dress to attract, or else teach them what is going to happen when they "attract".
-
As you know, the law says differently.
Lol, really? You have quite an imagination as to what the moral and civil laws happen to be.
And, well, if the parents don't want that, they better not let them dress to attract, or else teach them what is going to happen when they "attract".
Parents need to stop deluding themselves about their daughters. That's one of the main problems traditionalism is having.
-
It would be mortally sinful to dress in a way calculated to inflame venereal passions.
That's what I was saying.
Wouldn't it be more striking to say that to a girl, than to say that they shouldn't dress a certain way because it is immodest?
No, because some girls just wear clothes that are in fashion in order to fit in and aren't thinking about men's passion. These girls still need to dress modestly and it is not good to teach them to think very much about men's passion.
Good point. However, once they do "know", I think the modesty argument is weak.
-
And, well, if the parents don't want that, they better not let them dress to attract, or else teach them what is going to happen when they "attract".
Parents need to stop deluding themselves about their daughters. That's one of the main problems traditionalism is having.
You are saying that Jaynek is deluding herself to think that "some girls just wear clothes that are in fashion in order to fit in", and you think that they are knowingly thinking about men's passion when they wear those clothes?
It would be mortally sinful to dress in a way calculated to inflame venereal passions.
That's what I was saying.
Wouldn't it be more striking to say that to a girl, than to say that they shouldn't dress a certain way because it is immodest?
No, because some girls just wear clothes that are in fashion in order to fit in and aren't thinking about men's passion. These girls still need to dress modestly and it is not good to teach them to think very much about men's passion.
-
As an aside, a priest once told a mother that her daughters should not dress to attract men, unless they are of age to get married.
Age 16 is old enough to start accepting suitors.
As you know, the law says differently. And, well, if the parents don't want that, they better not let them dress to attract, or else teach them what is going to happen when they "attract".
I am not sure where you live, but girls can marry at sixteen in most jurisdictions in Western countries. One of my daughters married at 18 (to a man in his 30s) and I do not think there was anything wrong with this.
-
It would be mortally sinful to dress in a way calculated to inflame venereal passions.
That's what I was saying.
Wouldn't it be more striking to say that to a girl, than to say that they shouldn't dress a certain way because it is immodest?
No, because some girls just wear clothes that are in fashion in order to fit in and aren't thinking about men's passion. These girls still need to dress modestly and it is not good to teach them to think very much about men's passion.
Good point. However, once they do "know", I think the modesty argument is weak.
Girls do not understand what boys and men experience and teaching girls to dwell on this is just asking for trouble. It is possible to teach modesty without a focus on passion and this is much more suitable for girls.
-
Girls do not understand what boys and men experience and teaching girls to dwell on this is just asking for trouble.
You think teenage girls don't understand what boys are thinking about?
I think that is naivety.
-
Boys are more naive about women than vice-versa. Even today.
(and most women want it that way)
-
Girls do not understand what boys and men experience and teaching girls to dwell on this is just asking for trouble.
You think teenage girls don't understand what boys are thinking about?
I think that is naivety.
Girls might (or might not) have an intellectual understanding of how powerful men's sɛҳuąƖ urges are or how susceptible men are to visual triggers, but it is not the understanding that comes from personal experience.
-
Interesting thread to say the least.
There is one girl at my chapel that wears 4-5 inch designer high heels and a knee length skirt, tight-fitting, and tight fitting tops and she always sits in the front. It can be VERY distracting and hard to concentrate on mass.
I think heels above 2inches should not be allowed at mass unless they have a full length skirt, since most of those shoes basically look like hooker shoes and are very distracting for men.
It's like she fell out of a Vogue magazine.
I should probably mention something to Father.
-
Interesting thread to say the least.
There is one girl at my chapel that wears 4-5 inch designer high heels and a knee length skirt, tight-fitting, and tight fitting tops and she always sits in the front. It can be VERY distracting and hard to concentrate on mass.
I think heels above 2inches should not be allowed at mass unless they have a full length skirt, since most of those shoes basically look like hooker shoes and are very distracting for men.
It's like she fell out of a Vogue magazine.
I should probably mention something to Father.
You would not have had to mentioned it to Father, if he was paying attention to his job. I believe that they have been instructed not to say anything, unless someone comes to mass in a bikini.
-
Interesting thread to say the least.
There is one girl at my chapel that wears 4-5 inch designer high heels and a knee length skirt, tight-fitting, and tight fitting tops and she always sits in the front. It can be VERY distracting and hard to concentrate on mass.
I think heels above 2inches should not be allowed at mass unless they have a full length skirt, since most of those shoes basically look like hooker shoes and are very distracting for men.
It's like she fell out of a Vogue magazine.
I should probably mention something to Father.
Well, no, you should MOST DEFINITELY mention something to Father.
This goes right to the point. Women need to understand that just because
someone doesn't approach them and inform them about their dressing habits,
and how they are a walking occasion of sin when they "don't put some
clothes on" before they come to Mass, doesn't mean that people are not
thinking it.
They really ought to know this, but they 'play dumb' or whatever. When they
know what they are doing is wrong and they do it anyway, yes, that is most
decidedly a mortal sin.
Men cannot reasonably say anything to a woman about their immodest dress,
because to do so would be improper, and there is no way to say it without
breaking your own principle of "modesty in word and action."
It is up to the priest to say something, and it is usually in the Confessional, or
else from the pulpit in Sunday sermons. But for a priest to approach a woman
and to tell her she is dressed immodestly, is not an easy task.
The job of Porter, which is the lowest, or most basic level of minor orders, is
one that includes this charge, of telling someone they are not dressed
properly. All SSPX chapels I have seen have some kind of sign posted on the
front door and side entrances that announce this. At St. Peter's Basilica in
Rome, there is such a sign on the main entrance, and women who violate the
rules are asked to leave, and are welcome to return when properly dressed.
If a man can't handle being Porter, he should never have made it up to cleric.
And obviously, you have to have been a cleric before you can be a priest.
In those cases, it is the assignment of the porter to approach the women, and
he gets to know how best to pull that off successfully. But the average Joe in
the pews should not have to do that task.