Author Topic: Why even bother with the skirt on Sunday, then? (Read 6777 times)

John Grace · « **on:** May 04, 2013, 12:30:35 PM »

A very good question.

Fortitudo
http://cathinfo-warning-pornography!/Ignis_Ardens/index.php?showtopic=12341

Quote

I'm tired of seeing the women in my parish leading a double life:

they wear skirts to Mass on Sundays, and wear pants all the rest of the week.

Why even bother with the skirt on Sunday, then?

Telesphorus · « **Reply #1 on:** May 04, 2013, 12:43:39 PM »

It's still better they wear skirts to mass, even if they never wear them otherwise.

That being said, clearly the crypto-leftists, feminists, liberalizers and judaizers have made a total mess out of Archbishop Lefebvre's order.

It should not surprise us that the strength of Traditional Catholic identity is flagging.

You can't have crypto-leftist forum moderators, sedes who defend those behind the Doctrinal Preamble, Hanukkah celebrating newspapers like the Remnant, priests who speak of the Jєωs as "elder brothers" and expect observant people not to be scandalized.

John Grace · « **Reply #2 on:** May 04, 2013, 12:45:30 PM »

I thought it a good comment. The ladies are only letting themselves down by wearing the trousers during the week. There are exceptions but always good to see Trad women and girls wearing dresses at events, pro-life rallies etc etc.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #3 on:** May 04, 2013, 12:48:00 PM »

Quote from: John Grace

I thought it a good comment. The ladies are only letting themselves down by wearing the trousers during the week. There are exceptions but always good to see Trad women and girls wearing dresses at events, pro-life rallies etc etc.

It really is.

But sadly they are increasingly resentful of their natural role as women and therefore resentful of Catholic Tradition.

And that is because of covertly liberal priests corrupting them.

"In order to destroy Catholicism, it is necessary to commence by suppressing woman... But since we cannot suppress woman, let us corrupt her with the Church..."

- Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita

Napoli · « **Reply #4 on:** May 04, 2013, 03:05:51 PM »

Wholeheartedly agree.

The problem is, finding appropriate skirts. Of the right length and fit. My wife and daughters have a difficult time due to this cultures obsession with tight and short skirts.
I hate to say it, but my son's and I have it far easier. Although, most mmen's stores cater to the ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ perversion this society is entrenched in.
Pax

PereJoseph · « **Reply #5 on:** May 04, 2013, 03:20:45 PM »

Apparent personal hypocrisy (depending on the woman in question's reasons for her different choices of attire for different occasions) seems to be less evil than objective sacrilege. Thus, it seems better that, for whatever reason they do not wear women's clothing during the week, these women dress according to their nature for the Holy Mysteries.

wallflower · « **Reply #6 on:** May 04, 2013, 03:29:15 PM »

It is still a half step better to wear the skirt on Sunday. Even if there's a bit of a hypocritical streak to it, the alternative is worse. In my circle of friends and acquaintances, I have observed that once someone goes down the route of "just being honest" or not caring or having enough respect for Mass and those around them to conform that little bit, they are that much closer to being hardened of heart.

I can't speak for those who are not born or raised in tradition -- I think their journey in terms of clothing is different in many ways; but with those who are raised traditionally or have been living it for many years and know the thinking behind it, very often once they go "public" in pants or unquestionably immodest clothing (to the traditional public at Church, Church functions, schools, visiting families who wear skirts etc...) it's like a last symbolism of breaking away from traditional thought. And being fine with it. No fear of reprisal, in fact perhaps even inviting reprisal. There's often an in-your-face aspect to it. It often cements a downward spiral.

For anyone upset by the hypocrisy, perhaps they can contemplate the alternative and find at least a small measure of hope in the fact that those women still care that little bit to conform at least on Sunday. Not saying it's ideal. But it really could be worse. I would not wish for them to stop.

Rosarium · « **Reply #7 on:** May 05, 2013, 06:09:00 AM »

Quote from: John Grace

A very good question.

Fortitudo
http://cathinfo-warning-pornography!/Ignis_Ardens/index.php?showtopic=12341
Quote
I'm tired of seeing the women in my parish leading a double life:

they wear skirts to Mass on Sundays, and wear pants all the rest of the week.

Why even bother with the skirt on Sunday, then?

That is a very interesting thought. A person is personally tired of seeing people doing this. It is an odd thing that we (humans in general) are usually upset when we perceive hypocrisy and inconsistency in others, yet, we always have an excuse for ourselves. It seems to be a general human tendency.

What is the point of the question? Why bother? Does that mean they would be better not wearing skirts on Sunday and dress like they do everywhere else? It seems that many people dress differently to Mass, are they the same as these women?

People who watch TV shows, play video games, listen to profane (strict meaning) music, and read forbidden materials generally refrain from this activities at Mass...are they hypocrites too?

It is very easy to conform. Humans will find going along with others to be the easiest thing, so for this, I would say that the women are in a "default" mode of action. They are not really make a major decision. They are going along with those around them. This is something we all tend to do in most things, and the act of the will is generally evident when we defend our actions, or we make a change which goes against conformity.

So, those are the two things which I think should be considered:

* Don't fall prey to the easy tendency to focus on perception of hypocrisy in others and demanding consistency to a high degree in others acts. We generally do not hold ourselves to the same standard and will usually react negatively to such criticism.

* Watch out for conforming without reason. We will all have a strong tendency to conform to those around us. This is not usually an indication of a strong will, and the virtue or vice expressed is usually of a low level until we pay more mind to it.

Maizar · « **Reply #8 on:** May 05, 2013, 07:20:35 AM »

The important thing is not merely what people do, but what they mean by it, so I agree to a point with Rosarium. We shouldn't rush into judgement.

Women and girls today do not necessarily wear pants in order to appear less feminine, but because it is practical clothing that is superior to skirts/dresses for many tasks, and cheaper too.

When they mean to be noticed, then see how they dress. Pants at Church, or out to dinner, or to some kind of public event, is probably significant.

Zeitun · « **Reply #9 on:** May 05, 2013, 11:49:46 PM »

A saw a very nice looking young lady at Mass today appropriately dressed above the knees. She was barelegged and wearing very high open toed polka dot heels and had the ubiquitous red toenails. I would have done the same thing 25 years ago in my pagan days. Now it's sensible Mary Janes. I hope my husband isn't disappointed in me for wearing ugly shoes.

shin · « **Reply #10 on:** May 06, 2013, 02:01:08 AM »

Everyone wants a saint for a confessor.. they think of how wonderful that would be. . .

But how many folks would listen to St. Padre Pio if he were their confessor, simply under another name?

Some unidentified no one.. no stigmata.. no reputation as a saint.. but truly one.. telling them the same thing..

Throw away the pants.. No you can't give them to someone else.. no if you make your living by them you can't sell them..

No absolution until you no longer wear them.

But then again, it wasn't Padre truly who was there, refusing absolutions. Jesus was there.

... so who will say He was affected by the "culture"?

Shaking my head.

Maizar · « **Reply #11 on:** May 06, 2013, 04:37:03 AM »

Quote

"Whether you or your women wear or do not wear trousers neither impedes your salvation nor leads to any increase of your virtue"

sive vos, sive feminae vestrae, sive deponatis, sive induatis femoralia, nec saluti officit, nec ad virtutum vestrarum proficit incrementum.

Pope Nicholas I, 13 November 866 AD

Quote

"outward apparel should be consistent with the estate of the person, according to the general custom. Hence it is in itself sinful for a woman to wear man's clothes, or vice versa; and it is expressly forbidden in the Law (Deuteronomy 22).

St. Thomas Aquinas

It is not as clear cut as you all make out it to be. It all depends on what a person intends to do when they put their clothes on.

wallflower · « **Reply #12 on:** May 06, 2013, 09:52:27 AM »

Quote from: Maizar

Quote
"Whether you or your women wear or do not wear trousers neither impedes your salvation nor leads to any increase of your virtue"

sive vos, sive feminae vestrae, sive deponatis, sive induatis femoralia, nec saluti officit, nec ad virtutum vestrarum proficit incrementum.

Pope Nicholas I, 13 November 866 AD

This was not written to the general Catholic public of the time. It was written to converts who already had a custom in place.

Moreover, if you were to quote the whole thing, he says he would prefer that they move from the old man to the new, in other words, from their own customs to those of the Catholics, however, they are still carnal, they aren't yet ready to hear ALL. In other words they were still spiritually young and immature and wouldn't understand just yet, so they are accepted as they are. And that was a wise and prudent thing for the Pope to say.

I've always been a bit confounded at how anyone thinks this letter proves anything for pants. At most, I can see using it to tame someone who was over-zealous and berating women on the street for wearing pants. I can see using it as a call for patience and charity towards those coming from the modern world's custom of pants and giving new converts time to process and grow spiritually. I do not see in it more than that.

I highly, highly doubt all the Catholic women heard of the letter and got so excited that the POPE said they could wear pants!! Not to mention the pants being worn were nothing like the average pant of today. Today's average pant falls under immodesty if for no other reason than being tight and form-fitting.

A woman who has been raised traditionally or who has been so for some time, should at some point be spiritually mature enough to see not only the difference in the circuмstances of this letter but also of the bottom quote about general customs. If she is not, she may be rejecting the graces for some reason. Be it peer pressure, human respect, vanity, some other justification, I don't know what. Different women will have different reasons but the rejection will be there at some point. There's a sort of crossroads that women come to when they decide for themselves either to conform to what's being taught as a traditional Catholic ideal or to reject it as not applicable. We can't say exactly when it happens but unless a woman is particularly slow, it happens sooner rather than later. The concept of pants being tight and form-fitting is not particularly difficult. Fighting the urge to vanity behind it is much more difficult and a life-time struggle but the concept itself is quite simple.

Quote
"outward apparel should be consistent with the estate of the person, according to the general custom. Hence it is in itself sinful for a woman to wear man's clothes, or vice versa; and it is expressly forbidden in the Law (Deuteronomy 22).

St. Thomas Aquinas

It is not as clear cut as you all make out it to be. It all depends on what a person intends to do when they put their clothes on.

This again applies much more to the modern woman who knows nothing else than to the traditional Catholic woman who has been presented with a higher ideal. There's so much to be said but suffice it to say that Faith and virtue trump general custom every time. Wearing pants may not be objectively sinful but most pairs are because they are tight and form-fitting.

A female cut is female precisely because it is cut to accentuate certain areas better than a male cut would. Trust me, no one puts on a pair of pants and says oh good, this makes my butt look big and lumpy! Not that we should strive to be UNattractive but we should not be opposed to taking a good hard long look at what kind of attractive we are aiming to be.

A skirt can be flattering and we can admire ourselves in it, but if it falls in the range of what is traditionally seen as modest, it should not be accentuating anything specific. It flatters the figure without accentuating the details of said figure. Pants by definition accentuate the details of the figure. And they are meant to. Anyone who thinks those who drive the current general customs have their modesty and virtue in mind in their design is insanely naïve or purposely blinding themselves.

Besides the fact that general customs that pose problems to the cultivation of virtue must be opposed, skirts are not outside the general custom and there is nothing in choosing, encouraging or teaching to wear skirts as a higher Catholic ideal of modesty that goes against this principle.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #13 on:** May 06, 2013, 10:02:13 AM »

There's a big difference between nomadic pastoralist women wearing pants and women raised in western civilization wearing pants.

They do it today because of more than two centuries of feminist agitation.

Women are even being admitted into Skull and Bones and Grand Orient Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ now. Feminism is fanatical:

Quote

PARIS, Feb. 4 (UPI) -- The French minister for women's rights confirmed a centuries-old law banning women from wearing trousers was struck down and "is nothing but a museum piece."

The law, passed in November 1799 and amended a century later to allow women to wear trousers when "holding the handlebars of a bicycle or the reins of a horse," was confirmed to have been repealed last week by French Minister for Women's Rights Najat Vallaud-Belkacem, France 24 reported Monday.

The law was "incompatible with the principles of equality between men and women that are written into the constitution, as well as in France's European engagements," Vallaud-Belkacem said.

"Because of this incompatibility, this [law] is implicitly repealed. It has absolutely no legal effect. The docuмent is nothing but a museum piece."

Read more: http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2013/02/04/Old-French-womens-anti-pants-law-killed/UPI-19501359995323/#ixzz2SWbvX3a4

Maizar · « **Reply #14 on:** May 06, 2013, 04:16:16 PM »

Quote

There's a big difference between nomadic pastoralist women wearing pants and women raised in western civilization wearing pants.

Yes there is, because pants are not the problem, but the female/feminist attitude. Your quote about the French law illustrates this exactly. There were exceptions to the pants rule and these were appropriate. If there isn't a level headed approach to this, then people who are approaching Tradition will be put off, because they will receive a very different message from the one that should be given - namely that we are against feminism, not women.