Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX  (Read 69951 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Matthew

  • Mod
Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
« Reply #285 on: January 06, 2020, 10:57:30 AM »
Is this immodest?  My opinion is that it is not.


No offense, Ladislaus, but there is NO WAY in which this could be considered modest by a Catholic, much less a Traditional Catholic.
The skirt doesn't come to the knee, it's not modest. Full stop.
Imagine if that girl sat down! Or better yet, DON'T!

You have to have objective standards. Women (just like men) will always try to skirt the line (pun intended).

I fear that just like with the issue of makeup, you are compromising here out of borderline necessity, because your wife and/or daughters aren't fully operating under your well-educated Trad Catholic ex-seminarian control.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
« Reply #286 on: January 06, 2020, 11:09:17 AM »
No offense, Ladislaus, but there is NO WAY in which this could be considered modest by a Catholic, much less a Traditional Catholic.
The skirt doesn't come to the knee, it's not modest. Full stop.

Nope.  This is a combination of pants and skirt where the legs are covered.  Pants are inappropriate because they're not masculine and because they can cling to the behind ... not due to the leg part.  Skirts are immodest because they expose flesh above the knee.  But this combination overcomes both concerns.  You cannot see the behind, nor can you see the bare leg, nor is it masculine like pants. 

People need to understand the PRINCIPLES and the WHYs behind things in order to be able to adapter the principles to new circuмstances.  In too many ways, Trads have become very much like the Pharisees ... clinging mindlessly to the letter of the law.  I do not hold this combination to be immodest ... provided that the skirt isn't tight and the leggings are not see-through but cloth-like and on the thicker side.


Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
« Reply #287 on: January 06, 2020, 11:12:09 AM »
I fear that just like with the issue of makeup, you are compromising here out of borderline necessity, because your wife and/or daughters aren't fully operating under your well-educated Trad Catholic ex-seminarian control.

Same bull-crap you get from your slanderous buddy SeanJohnson.  Constant ad hominems when you're incapable of making a rational argument.  My girls do not wear this combination of clothing.  I am not making any points or not taking any positions other than what reasoning leads me to.  I arrived at the conclusion based on reasoning through WHY certain things are considered immodest, why pants are immodest and why shorts skirts are immodest, and explaining how this particular combination does not labor under either concern (when properly executed ... not too tight and leggins on the thicker side).

Did you reprimand Johnson for slandering and clumniating not only myself but the theologians Jone and Merkelbach?  You too are committing slander by making this suggestion, BTW.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
« Reply #288 on: January 06, 2020, 11:53:48 AM »
I apologize for the frustration, but I am constantly being attacked personally whenever I make an argument or take a position on anything.  And I'm at my wit's end.  Not because I really care about what anyone thinks, but because my intention is to have a rational discussion and argument, and it's constantly being derailed by this type of nonsense.

People need to stop this nonsense and actually address the argument.

I laid out a rational argument for why I would consider this modest (given certain conditions).  Go ahead with a rebuttal, but stop the personal attacks and insinuations.

Yesterday SeanJohnson called me a sodomite simply for defending a theological position held by an approved pre-Vatican II Catholic theologian (and which was in fact the common opinion in his day and which is still the common opinion among Traditional Catholic priests).  Today I am being told that I have taken a position based on a false allegation about my motivations for taking the position.  This is invariably a sign of somebody EMOTIONALLY (rather than rationally) clinging to a position, and when someone is incapable of making a rational rebuttal to an argument challenging their position, they lash out with ad hominems.

I laid out the rationale for why I consider this to be modest.  Go ahead and rebut the argument if you will, but stick to reason.  If you can come up with a rational argument, I am happy to change my mind about any subject.  If you can convince me with reason that it's the proper thing to do, then I might even fly to Rome personally to kiss Bergoglio's ring.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
« Reply #289 on: January 06, 2020, 12:02:36 PM »
By the way, like a good Thomist, I can actually anticipate one particular possible objection to this position.  I want to see if someone else can actually come up with it.  This is the method of St. Thomas.  To test your arguments, you anticipate in your mind objections.  You pretend as if you're trying to refute it.  Then either you can refine the argument or abandon it, depending upon whether this leads to.  So you don't beg the question and adopt a conclusion based on some emotional attachment to it.  You simply follow where reason takes you.  THIS is the type of discussion I'm interested in having on this forum, not all the emotional nonsense that seems to be the norm.