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

Poll

Do you see anything wrong with an "Ora Pro Nobis" Harley, Academy boys running in shorts, or Mass on a Jeep hood without necessity?

Yes, these things are all problematic.
16 (51.6%)
Tempest in a Teacup (i.e., nitpicking)
9 (29%)
What's the problem?
6 (19.4%)

Total Members Voted: 29

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 13

Author Topic: Pics from the Latest Rorate Coeli Report  (Read 7371 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Last Tradhican

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6293
  • Reputation: +3330/-1939
  • Gender: Male
Re: Pics from the Latest Rorate Coeli Report
« Reply #60 on: January 21, 2020, 09:41:03 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Here's some long shorts, they are still shorts which Bp. Williamson said men should not wear (moreover, it is just leaving oneself open for bug bites, cuts, burns, grease and dirt..... for the sake of following fashions, low class fashions):

    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46895
    • Reputation: +27758/-5162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Pics from the Latest Rorate Coeli Report
    « Reply #61 on: January 21, 2020, 09:51:30 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Last Tradhican on January 21, 2020, 09:39:31 AM
    This OP has no pictures

    OP can be understood in two senses:

    Original Post

    Orginal Poster

    You were using it in the first sense, I in the second.

    SeanJohnson, the Original Poster, posted pictures here:  https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/pics-from-the-latest-rorate-coeli-report/msg684562/#msg684562
    Logged

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4750
    • Reputation: +2897/-667
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Pics from the Latest Rorate Coeli Report
    « Reply #62 on: January 21, 2020, 09:57:55 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on January 20, 2020, 03:37:43 PM
    Here is the Mass photo (need to be logged in to see)
    Sean, I totally agree with you. This is not necessary, thus not acceptable.
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4750
    • Reputation: +2897/-667
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Pics from the Latest Rorate Coeli Report
    « Reply #63 on: January 21, 2020, 09:59:46 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on January 20, 2020, 03:39:07 PM
    Here is the Harley photo (need to be logged in to see).
    This is extremely tacky. It reminds me of “traditionalists” who get tattoos of sacred things.
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline Last Tradhican

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6293
    • Reputation: +3330/-1939
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Pics from the Latest Rorate Coeli Report
    « Reply #64 on: January 21, 2020, 10:03:12 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on January 21, 2020, 09:51:30 AM
    OP can be understood in two senses:

    Original Post

    Orginal Poster

    You were using it in the first sense, I in the second.

    SeanJohnson, the Original Poster, posted pictures here:  https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/pics-from-the-latest-rorate-coeli-report/msg684562/#msg684562
    OK, the pictures  are not on the opening thread and one has to be logged in to see the pictures posted later down the page. I thought there was something wrong with my browser.

    So, the only picture of shorts we are talking about is the one I described as hairy legged men wearing shorts. So, my posting stands as written before:


    Quote
    Bishop Willamson taught that men should not wear shorts, so I stopped wearing shorts, no big deal.

    Those are hairy legged men in the pictures, not little children.

    Where I live it is very hot, and yet it is not wise to wear shorts because of sunburn, bug bites (mosquito, fire ants, wasps, chiggers, no-see-ums...…), thorn cuts, scrapes, muffler burns...…
    Logged

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4750
    • Reputation: +2897/-667
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Pics from the Latest Rorate Coeli Report
    « Reply #65 on: January 21, 2020, 10:03:53 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on January 20, 2020, 03:41:07 PM
    Here’s the boys all in shorts: (need to be logged in to see)
    Not acceptable. We don’t allow our boys to wear shorts.
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline Last Tradhican

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6293
    • Reputation: +3330/-1939
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Pics from the Latest Rorate Coeli Report
    « Reply #66 on: January 21, 2020, 10:05:21 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Quo vadis Domine on January 21, 2020, 10:03:53 AM
    Not acceptable. We don’t allow our boys to wear shorts.
    I agree, but I  would not call the hairy legged men in the picture, boys.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46895
    • Reputation: +27758/-5162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Pics from the Latest Rorate Coeli Report
    « Reply #67 on: January 21, 2020, 10:10:31 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Last Tradhican on January 21, 2020, 09:41:03 AM
    Here's some long shorts, they are still shorts which Bp. Williamson said men should not wear ...

    Some of you never bother to ask WHY with regard to any practice?  Understanding WHY allows you to apply principles to new situations.

    WHY should men not wear shorts?  At the same time, define "shorts".  Are pants "shorts" if they stop 2 inches above the ankle?

    Do these knee-length "shorts" constitute immodesty?  I don't see it.

    Are these knee-length "shorts" somehow effeminate?  I don't see that either.

    I'm not interested in the practical objections you cite as you're simply conflating them in with the moral consideration to solidify your case.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46895
    • Reputation: +27758/-5162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Pics from the Latest Rorate Coeli Report
    « Reply #68 on: January 21, 2020, 10:11:09 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Last Tradhican on January 21, 2020, 10:05:21 AM
    I agree, but I  would not call the hairy legged men in the picture, boys.

    Not to mention, are these even "shorts"?
    Logged

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4750
    • Reputation: +2897/-667
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Pics from the Latest Rorate Coeli Report
    « Reply #69 on: January 21, 2020, 10:16:33 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Last Tradhican on January 21, 2020, 10:05:21 AM
    I agree, but I  would not call the hairy legged men in the picture, boys.
    I wouldn’t have as much of a problem if it was just boys together without girls nearby. That’s a coed school. The thing is, it’s not very becoming for men to wear shorts and when you allow boys to wear them, they become conditioned to think it's acceptable and will wear then when they are older. 
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46895
    • Reputation: +27758/-5162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Pics from the Latest Rorate Coeli Report
    « Reply #70 on: January 21, 2020, 10:19:45 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Quo vadis Domine on January 21, 2020, 10:16:33 AM
    I wouldn’t have as much of a problem if it was just boys together without girls nearby. That’s a coed school. The thing is, it’s not very becoming for men to wear shorts and when you allow boys to wear them, they become conditioned to think it's acceptable and will wear then when they are older.

    Knee-length "shorts" were common in Catholics schools in the first part of the last century.  I'm honestly not seeing the problem with these.  It's almost like people merely hear the term "shorts" and get "triggered" by the word.
    Logged

    Offline Last Tradhican

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6293
    • Reputation: +3330/-1939
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Pics from the Latest Rorate Coeli Report
    « Reply #71 on: January 21, 2020, 10:21:24 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on January 21, 2020, 10:10:31 AM
    Some of you never bother to ask WHY with regard to any practice?  Understanding WHY allows you to apply principles to new situations.

    WHY should men not wear shorts?  At the same time, define "shorts".  Are pants "shorts" if they stop 2 inches above the ankle?

    Do these knee-length "shorts" constitute immodesty?  I don't see it.

    Are these knee-length "shorts" somehow effeminate?  I don't see that either.

    I'm not interested in the practical objections you cite as you're simply conflating them in with the moral consideration to solidify your case.
    I do ask Why with regard to a practice. Your only Why, immodestly, only applies to short shorts, and Bp. Williamson never said that immodesty was the ONLY Why. Here are some of the Why's:

    They are sloven and low class
    They are the clothes of children
    They serve no purpose other than fashion (a purpose would be basketball, or swimming, then your WHY of modesty would come into play on the length)
    One opens themselves to sunburn, bug bites, thorns, cuts, bruises....
    "Do onto other as you would have them do onto you" - I don't want to see other men's hairy legs, no calf or cankles, so, I do not wear shorts myself.

    By the way, by your only WHY, immodesty, you would not have a leg to stand on with regard to women wearing loose fitting pants. Bp. Williamson also taught that women can't wear pants, and it was not only because of immodesty like for instance tight form fitting jeans, it was because pants are the clothing on men. In this case of the shorts, there is a similar WHY they should not be worn by men,  it is because they are the clothes of children, my #2 above.
    Logged

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4750
    • Reputation: +2897/-667
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Pics from the Latest Rorate Coeli Report
    « Reply #72 on: January 21, 2020, 10:34:02 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on January 21, 2020, 10:10:31 AM
    Some of you never bother to ask WHY with regard to any practice?  Understanding WHY allows you to apply principles to new situations.

    WHY should men not wear shorts?  At the same time, define "shorts".  Are pants "shorts" if they stop 2 inches above the ankle?

    Do these knee-length "shorts" constitute immodesty?  I don't see it.

    Are these knee-length "shorts" somehow effeminate?  I don't see that either.

    I'm not interested in the practical objections you cite as you're simply conflating them in with the moral consideration to solidify your case.
    I agree with you to a point, Lad. As I said above “I wouldn’t have as much of a problem if it was just boys together without girls nearby. That’s a coed school.“ I do believe, depending upon the length, they can be considered immodest. Remember that shorts are a relatively new fashion and some of them do look girly. Yes, some longer ones can be considered not necessarily immodest, but the longer they get, they become more effeminate, so there is a moral component here.

    I think the bigger problem is that they are not dignified and not becoming for man to wear. I suppose there are certain situations that can warrant acceptability, but they are few and far between. It’s just another straw added to the camels back in the fast paced track to the destruction of a formerly mature and rational society.  
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline Last Tradhican

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6293
    • Reputation: +3330/-1939
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Pics from the Latest Rorate Coeli Report
    « Reply #73 on: January 21, 2020, 10:38:01 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on January 21, 2020, 10:19:45 AM
    Knee-length "shorts" were common in Catholics schools in the first part of the last century.  I'm honestly not seeing the problem with these.  It's almost like people merely hear the term "shorts" and get "triggered" by the word.
    I question whether they were common wear during the year considering that you have cold winters in all of the USA except for South Florida. More importantly, they were worn by children, not hairy legged "boys" like those men in the picture.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46895
    • Reputation: +27758/-5162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Pics from the Latest Rorate Coeli Report
    « Reply #74 on: January 21, 2020, 10:42:21 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Quo vadis Domine on January 21, 2020, 10:34:02 AM
    “I wouldn’t have as much of a problem if it was just boys together without girls nearby. That’s a coed school.“ I do believe, depending upon the length, they can be considered immodest.

    Yes, I too agree that shorts in general are immodest.  Not that they would typically constitute any "occasion of sin" for girls who happen to behold their hairy legs, but, rather because I consider modesty to be a broader concept.  But these things are long enough where modesty is not a consideration really.

    With regard to dignity, that's a little slippery.  If I am a farmer and wear grungy clothes or overalls, or if I just wear jeans in general, one might make the case that thy are "undignified".  But just as it would be perfectly appropriate to compromise dignity a bit so that a man can do farm work without wearing his Sunday best, so too I don't think there's any problem with wearing these knee-length shorts in order to run.  I do not consider this level of "indignity" to be sinful ... given the context.  Now, if these boys were to dress like this at, say, the grocery store, I would consider that slovenly and undignified, and perhaps a very slight sin with regard to being sloppy, but I'm not seeing any offense against modesty or against masculinity (these shorts do not appear at all feminine).  Dressing like that for Mass, of course, would certainly be unacceptable.  Now, those 1970s short shorts were both extremely immodest and effeminate ... to the point that the men wearing them could easily be taken for ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs.  But I'm not seeing that with these either.
    Logged
    Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 13
    « previous next »