Author Topic: How Catholics ought to dress (email from SSPX) (Read 9937 times)

St Gertrude · « **Reply #30 on:** June 25, 2015, 05:18:25 PM »

Once at our chapel, a woman went up to receive. Her head was not covered and her blouse was, um, let's just say that it revealed far too much. When she knelt down to receive, the priest leaned over and said "When you come properly attired, you can receive." I thought--good for him! Many, many years ago I made the mistake of going to our local NO church (we had no SSPX here then) and a man of about 50 who was the head of the parish council took up the collection. He was wearing Bermuda shorts, flip-flops and a t-shirt with a beer ad on it. No, I am not making this up!

tdrev123 · « **Reply #31 on:** June 25, 2015, 06:17:42 PM »

Quote from: St Gertrude

Once at our chapel, a woman went up to receive. Her head was not covered and her blouse was, um, let's just say that it revealed far too much. When she knelt down to receive, the priest leaned over and said "When you come properly attired, you can receive." I thought--good for him! Many, many years ago I made the mistake of going to our local NO church (we had no SSPX here then) and a man of about 50 who was the head of the parish council took up the collection. He was wearing Bermuda shorts, flip-flops and a t-shirt with a beer ad on it. No, I am not making this up!

That anecdote of the lady is almost exactly my point, but not the one you were thinking of.

The priest denied communion to an immodestly dressed woman, but I highly doubt he talked to her about how women are supposed to dress at all times, not just for communion. For many priests it seems like it is only about the 'show' of modesty at mass, not actually instructing how people are supposed to dress outside of mass, because that is not part of the 'show'.

Matthew · « **Reply #32 on:** June 26, 2015, 12:58:43 AM »

Quote from: MrsZ

And it's not just attractive young women either. FAt or thin, young or old ... wearing pants ... everyone's backsides are on display. It's just that most women could care less about men's backsides. At the N.O. parish we attend, rows and rows of women, young and old alike wearing pants ... big backsides, small backsides, all with pockets, or pockets with designs or things on them to DRAW ATTENTION to their backsides!

It's like we're all baboons anymore....sending out the mating call.

I don't remember if I posted this, or just intended to post it:

I was going to comment on the current fashion in women's jeans to have sequins, rhinestones, etc. on the 2 back pockets -- basically drawing attention to her butt.

It's like T-shirts with writing across the chest -- worn by a woman. So now we're supposed to look there, so we can read the message? A bit sneaky, if you ask me. Natural curiosity to read a message is not the same as intending a lecherous or immodest look -- but because of such T-shirts, some guys are tricked into looking, as it were.

Marlelar · « **Reply #33 on:** June 26, 2015, 01:25:20 AM »

Quote from: tdrev123

I would say that the churches I have been to, more than half of the women wear pants regularly outside of mass...and the priests know this and they are silent as a cat.

I wonder how the priests know what a woman wears outside of Mass? Are they stalkers?

St Gertrude · « **Reply #34 on:** June 27, 2015, 08:08:47 PM »

And even though I am an old woman, I am still conscious of how people look. It is not just the ladies who are immodest. I have seen some guys (not trads, thank goodness) just guys in the general population who wear jeans so low and so tight that they leave very little to the imagination. If I had a son who dressed like that, I would be mortified. The worst thing of all (perhaps it just a fad here in the western US) is guys who wear patterned boxer shorts and then pull their trousers down so about six inches of shorts are showing. When I was a young woman (a loooong time ago, granted) we were embarrassed to death if our slip showed an inch below our skirt hemline, etc. And back then, guys were not allowed to dress immodestly, either. But after yesterday's Supreme Court ruling, I guess nothing would surprise me. It's like we have tossed the rule book out the window.

Miseremini · « **Reply #35 on:** June 28, 2015, 04:07:41 PM »

Quote from: St Gertrude

And even though I am an old woman, I am still conscious of how people look. It is not just the ladies who are immodest. I have seen some guys (not trads, thank goodness) just guys in the general population who wear jeans so low and so tight that they leave very little to the imagination. If I had a son who dressed like that, I would be mortified. The worst thing of all (perhaps it just a fad here in the western US) is guys who wear patterned boxer shorts and then pull their trousers down so about six inches of shorts are showing. When I was a young woman (a loooong time ago, granted) we were embarrassed to death if our slip showed an inch below our skirt hemline, etc. And back then, guys were not allowed to dress immodestly, either. But after yesterday's Supreme Court ruling, I guess nothing would surprise me. It's like we have tossed the rule book out the window.

I too remember the time you are speaking about. Guys don't realize how immodest they can appear. I've seen trads sitting down for coffee after Mass with legs splayed and there is nothing left to the immagination. Even priests sit this way but thankfully their cassock covers all.

Men.....watch your posture when sitting.

:geezer: