Author Topic: SSPX Immodesty Down Under  (Read 4014 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline B USC90

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 60
  • Reputation: +42/-57
  • Gender: Male
Re: SSPX Immodesty Down Under
« Reply #45 on: May 06, 2019, 02:08:23 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
  • If your kid falls into a pond or lake, you're going to wish he got swimming lessons.

    Let's not be puritanical here.
    "There is no Catholic God." ~ Ladislaus (CathInfo member agreeing multiple times with Francis the Destroyer)

    Offline B USC90

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 60
    • Reputation: +42/-57
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX Immodesty Down Under
    « Reply #46 on: May 06, 2019, 02:09:05 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • I agree with Laud
    "There is no Catholic God." ~ Ladislaus (CathInfo member agreeing multiple times with Francis the Destroyer)


    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4521
    • Reputation: +2755/-1253
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX Immodesty Down Under
    « Reply #47 on: May 06, 2019, 02:19:09 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0

  • Quote
    But it seems like some people here think people need to be fully dressed at all times (except while showering) 'cause "immodest dress" scandalizes the angels or something like that, and that's what I'm majorly not understanding.
    Let’s go back to the Garden of Eden.  Adam and Eve were married before the Fall.  There was no scandal between them in being nude.  Yet, when they sinned, they covered themselves BECAUSE OF GOD.  They covered themselves because of their fallen/sinful nature had been corrupted.  Thus, we can say that dressing modestly is NOT only for our neighbor but also due to Original Sin and reverence for God (somehow...but I can’t explain it fully).   In the same way, it is said that our guardian angel, being God's representative to us, is not pleased when we do not dress as we should.  

    Secondly your comment about “needing to be fully dressed at all times (outside showering)” is an exaggeration.  There’s certainly gray area in all of this.  One person’s PJs is another person’s scandal.  The point is not to tell people how to dress but to draw lines in the sand (ie to regularly sleep nude is probably not modest, 1) it’s not necessary and 2) it’s not normal for the avg person).

    Offline forlorn

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1485
    • Reputation: +592/-891
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX Immodesty Down Under
    « Reply #48 on: May 06, 2019, 02:36:26 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • You're right. We should walk around naked! lol
    No, God has never demanded we be clothed. But our concupiscence and lust after the Fall in the Garden has necessitated clothing.
    Yes, but people above were saying that you somehow offend your Guardian Angel with it. Your Guardian Angel doesn't lust. 

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 23002
    • Reputation: +20144/-243
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX Immodesty Down Under
    « Reply #49 on: May 06, 2019, 02:45:20 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Let’s go back to the Garden of Eden.  Adam and Eve were married before the Fall.  There was no scandal between them in being nude.  Yet, when they sinned, they covered themselves BECAUSE OF GOD.  They covered themselves because of their fallen/sinful nature had been corrupted.  Thus, we can say that dressing modestly is NOT only for our neighbor but also due to Original Sin and reverence for God (somehow...but I can’t explain it fully).

    Yeah, you can't explain it fully because you have no documentation to back up your idea -- you're just making it up.

    You said - "Because of GOD" -- says who? Where did you read or learn that?

    They covered themselves when they heard God walking in the Garden because they were ashamed -- one of the many effects of Original Sin which they had just committed. They also no longer had perfect control over their lower nature and passions, which made clothing necessary from that moment onward.

    The body didn't become non-good or dirty after the Fall. It became internally disordered. The passions began to rule instead of the intellect/Free will as it should be. A revolution happened within Man. That doesn't mean God and the angels all the sudden don't want to look at man's form, or found it any more disgusting than they did when Adam & Eve were first created. The only change from heaven's side: they felt sorry for us now.

    The only "corruption" that happened after the Fall is: a new lack of order and proper subordination among Man's faculties, Man received the punishment of death and suffering, his intellect became inclined to error, he lost the right to Heaven -- but nothing else (as if that's not awful enough!)

    Clothing is for man's benefit - to help others to avoid concupiscence, as well as maintain a sense of modesty in themselves (here is where not walking around naked when alone comes in).

    Think of it like a veil on a woman's head -- it's a sign of submission to someone else's authority. It's a sign that you are letting someone else be in control (God) rather than your passions. The same for covering up the parts of the body which most involve, and exemplify, the rebellion of the passions.

    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!


    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4521
    • Reputation: +2755/-1253
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX Immodesty Down Under
    « Reply #50 on: May 06, 2019, 02:54:29 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    It's a sign that you are letting someone else be in control (God) rather than your passions.
    Yes, that's what I meant by "reverence for God".  Thanks for explaining it better.

    Online Nadir

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6003
    • Reputation: +3304/-194
    • Gender: Female
    Re: SSPX Immodesty Down Under
    « Reply #51 on: May 06, 2019, 04:38:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • God never demanded Adam and Eve cover up.
    He didn't need to; they wanted to.
     [21] And the Lord God made for Adam and his wife, garments of skins, and clothed them.

    Offline ByzCat3000

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 457
    • Reputation: +94/-30
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX Immodesty Down Under
    « Reply #52 on: May 06, 2019, 05:27:27 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • You're right. We should walk around naked! lol
    No, God has never demanded we be clothed. But our concupiscence and lust after the Fall in the Garden has necessitated clothing.
    That's not forlorn's argument.  His argument is that neither God nor Guardian Angels (Which would have existed before the Fall) are scandalized by nudity, rather the *reason* for covering up is primarily in order to avoid scandalizing others, *which is ultimately to please God.*

    I do agree with the nuances Pax and Matthew made here, regularly wandering around nude for no reason would seem to be unbecoming even if there was nobody to see it, but the reason for even that has to be something other than one's guardian angel and such.


    Online SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4427
    • Reputation: +4002/-1316
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX Immodesty Down Under
    « Reply #53 on: May 06, 2019, 05:48:10 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • When I was in a monastery as a novice, we wore an inner tunic at all times (except when showering). That inner tunic served as our nightgown and as our inner tunic over which we placed the holy habit (the outer tunic).

    Even in the hot Southern California summer when the temperatures rose to 115 or more, we still wore this inner tunic to bed, and we were required to cover our bodies with at least one sheet with our hands crossing our chest. Some nuns even slept in a coffin to remind themselves that death could overtake them at any time and that our guardian angels would blush if we slept immodestly.

    We are never alone as our guardian angels are always with us. We should respect them by dressing modestly at all times, even when alone.

    Also remember that God is everywhere present and sees all things.

    O Heavenly King, O Comforter, O Spirit of Truth,
    Who art everywhere present and fillest all things,
    Come and abide in us, and cleanse us of all impurity,
    And save our souls, O Good One.

    I thought this was a very edifying post.
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-

    Online SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4427
    • Reputation: +4002/-1316
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX Immodesty Down Under
    « Reply #54 on: May 06, 2019, 05:57:31 PM »
  • Thanks!4
  • No Thanks!0
  • Often times, when these types of modern issues arise (e.g., swimming, makeup, modesty, women wearing men's attire, women in the workplace, NFP, etc.), regardless of what is said online, I think back to the Dessert Fathers and the ascetics, and I thank my guardian angel for looking out for me, and calling me back to sentire cum ecclesia.

    When the devil attacks with charges of prudism, Jansenism, rigorism, Protestantism, or whateverism, I just think for a minute or two about our great forefathers, and all doubts vanish.

    The scoffers scoff to get what they want.

    OK, let them have it.

    But me and mine will stick to the old ways, regardless of what the rest of the world does.
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-

    Offline SusanneT

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 263
    • Reputation: +113/-22
    • Gender: Female
    Re: SSPX Immodesty Down Under
    « Reply #55 on: May 06, 2019, 06:15:43 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I bought a water slide pool for our back yard (rather my husband did), and I don’t ever need to go to a pool again. I also,  not thinking when it was first offered, stopped my daughters taking swim class. We wear modest suits even in our backyard, being at home is not excuse to skimp on modesty. I just wish modest suits weren’t so expensive. It is quite scandalous that an sspx church would allow this.
    I completely agree being at home amongst family, in a same sex environment or even alone is not an excuse for immodesty or more importantly for teaching children sinful behaviour. 


    Offline ByzCat3000

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 457
    • Reputation: +94/-30
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX Immodesty Down Under
    « Reply #56 on: May 06, 2019, 06:23:45 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I completely agree being at home amongst family, in a same sex environment or even alone is not an excuse for immodesty or more importantly for teaching children sinful behaviour.
    I think what constitutes immodesty in each of these three instances can differ dramatically either from each other and from mixed sex environments.

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4521
    • Reputation: +2755/-1253
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX Immodesty Down Under
    « Reply #57 on: May 06, 2019, 06:25:37 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    When the devil attacks with charges of prudism, Jansenism, rigorism, Protestantism, or whateverism, I just think for a minute or two about our great forefathers, and all doubts vanish.
    I agree.  Certainly there is a danger (as history shows) of being a rigorist or a jansenist, etc.  However, how many saints also said that we must be "fools for Christ" in order to gain heaven?  Therefore, we are called to stay as far from the "mortal sin line" as possible, even if that means being viewed as an extremist.  How many saints preached the fewness of the saved?  Many.  Is it better to be extreme and cross over in Jansenism for a time, rather than be lukewarm for the rest of your life?  If one is extreme in their search for Christ, but does so WITH HUMILITY, then Christ will not let them be Jansenists for long, even if their natural inclinations push them there.  The key is to stay humble, even while being extreme.  God would rather us be hot or cold, not lukewarm.

    Offline SusanneT

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 263
    • Reputation: +113/-22
    • Gender: Female
    Re: SSPX Immodesty Down Under
    « Reply #58 on: May 06, 2019, 06:28:14 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I think what constitutes immodesty in each of these three instances can differ dramatically either from each other and from mixed sex environments.
    I would agree that what constitutes appropriate clothing varies with different circumstances.  But not the most basic standards of modesty.  

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 23002
    • Reputation: +20144/-243
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX Immodesty Down Under
    « Reply #59 on: May 06, 2019, 08:22:05 PM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!1
  • Often times, when these types of modern issues arise (e.g., swimming, makeup, modesty, women wearing men's attire, women in the workplace, NFP, etc.), regardless of what is said online, I think back to the Dessert Fathers and the ascetics, and I thank my guardian angel for looking out for me, and calling me back to sentire cum ecclesia.

    FYI, here is my position on the issues you brought up:

    swimming - not necessary; if done in public, men/women must have their thighs covered (shorts) and not show off their back, belly, chest, or underarms. In short, modesty. If modest swimsuits aren't available, either do without swimming (it's not necessary for life) or throw on a T-shirt and/or mens pair of shorts (knee length) over your regular one-piece swimsuit.

    makeup - women shouldn't wear makeup. It's fake, expensive, full of chemicals, vanity, and it literally stinks! Natural beauty and interior beauty are the ONLY kinds of beauty.

    modesty - Marylike standards of dress (someone posted the details above).

    women wearing men's attire - no shorts, slacks, or pants for women. Skirts/ dresses only, and they must be a couple inches below the knee minimum. Preferably ankle-length.

    women in the workplace - women shouldn't have male co-workers. They might have to "work with men" to a lesser degree, but they shouldn't be elbow-to-elbow with them all day, doing the exact same job, if you know what I mean. Single women, to earn a living, should stick to feminine jobs like teaching (children), nursing, childcare, secretarial, bookkeeping, etc. They shouldn't be in authority over men, and they shouldn't be in dangerous "mens" jobs at all. No police officers, soldiers, firefighters, oil rig workers, etc.

    NFP - I don't usually get into this fight personally, but even if it were acceptable to use the Rhythm method in certain circumstances, I would point out that "economic difficulty" is highly overestimated by most. If you give up the American Dream i.e., the suburban middle class lifestyle, you'd be surprised how many children you can afford. Especially when you refrain from worldliness, engage in a bit of self-mortification and frugality, and learn some discipline. It can be done.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16