Afraid to go to TLM?

[ctos]

I wear dress slacks to work and to every “formal” event. From what I read here, DH would be the only one who would not booted at the door for dress code violations

Thank you for proving my point very nicely. Was there really a need to be snarky and sarcastic on a thread where people were being honest and, up to this point, quite kind and civil?

I don’t mean to be snarky (re finding a non-challenging mass and not being sanctified). My point was simply that if one’s goal is to assume that one is ‘already okay’ and just wants to find a place of worship where one will be accepted, then that’s not putting God first. There are reasons why Catholics frown on women wearing pants. The reason is, they shouldn’t wear pants.

 

[aboverubies]

There are reasons why Catholics frown on women wearing pants. The reason is, they shouldn’t wear pants.

 

[djrakowski]

I don’t mean to be snarky (re finding a non-challenging mass and not being sanctified). My point was simply that if one’s goal is to assume that one is ‘already okay’ and just wants to find a place of worship where one will be accepted, then that’s not putting God first. There are reasons why Catholics frown on women wearing pants. The reason is, they shouldn’t wear pants.

Do you have any doctrinal support for this assertion?

 

[maber43]

One reason why my wife won’t go to TLM in the winter, she has to wear pants to keep her legs warm. It’s too cold in the Church. But never in jeans. So, we go to NO mass during the winter time.
But in the late spring, summer and early fall, she will wear long dresses or skirts at TLM.:angel1:

PAX,
Mel

 

[DavidJoseph]

My TLM parish doesn’t forbid women from wearing pants – just so long as they’re not tight and revealing. I mean, we do have a dress code, but it’s focused on modesty – no t-shirts, no shorts, nothing tight and revealing, no blouses that show off cleavage, no skirts or dresses that don’t at least cover the knees when seated, no skirts with slits in them that go past the knees. And headcoverings for women are highly encouraged but NOT mandatory.

 

[jmcrae]

There are reasons why Catholics frown on women wearing pants. The reason is, they shouldn’t wear pants.

This is ridiculous. Pants are much more modest than skirts - I’ve never caught a man or boy trying to look up my pants, after all.

 

[Windmill]

it depends on where you are. in texas, some pants look like they’ve been spray-painted on. it leaves little to the imagination and makes a show of immodesty.

i don’t understand the problem with a modest, comfort-fitting pair of slacks. someone try and convince me otherwise, but i think you can be modest with slacks.

 

[ctos]

This is ridiculous. Pants are much more modest than skirts - I’ve never caught a man or boy trying to look up my pants, after all.

You’re saving them the trouble, by exposing the outline anyway. Not to mention the example set: no doubt about it, female immodesty is rampant. Christians are supposed to be a countersign pointing to God, not simply blending in with the trend.

 

[jmcrae]

You’re saving them the trouble, by exposing the outline anyway. Not to mention the example set: no doubt about it, female immodesty is rampant. Christians are supposed to be a countersign pointing to God, not simply blending in with the trend.

Well, I have never been molested or harassed while wearing pants, so for my own comfort, and the freedom to go outside without being continually harrassed, I will continue to wear pants.

I don’t think men really “get” how annoying it is to be continually badgered for sex, wherever and whenever, and if wearing pants gets them what they want without them having to bother me for it, then I’m fine with that, as long as I can get my errands done, and do my work, in peace and quiet.

Although what I really think is that when I wear pants, they don’t even see me as a sex object at all.

 

[apricot_yogurt]

I own no skirts. I despise wearing them as they are uncomfortable, impractical and chilly. On the odd occasions I have worn them I am driven mad by them. I hate trousers, as they are unflattering. I only wear jeans or maternity jeans at the moment. I cannot understand this women must wear skirts mentality. I show more butt and tummy in a skirt. Perhaps men like them as they can just yank them up?
I was always told that we should come to Jesus as we are.
I also own two pairs of shoes, winter boots and hiking shoes. I can only wear one at a time anyway. So could I come to a TLM? Would I been seen as scruffy/slutty because I didn’t spend my money on an uncomfortable impractical vain outfit?
I am not poor, I simply hate clothes that have no practical use and are not comfortable.

 

[timjp77]

I also own two pairs of shoes, winter boots and hiking shoes. I can only wear one at a time anyway. So could I come to a TLM? Would I been seen as scruffy/slutty because I didn’t spend my money on an uncomfortable impractical vain outfit?
I am not poor, I simply hate clothes that have no practical use and are not comfortable.

You could come to the TLM that I attend in Kansas City, KS staffed by the FSSP. No one would say anything to you about your appearance. There are women on occasion that wear jeans, and not a one of them have been kicked out of Mass for it.

I think you miss the point though. The TLM brings a huge sense of piety to those who attend. I would invite you to attend a High Mass and then tell us that you’d even want to wear jeans, winter boots, or hiking shoes to your next one.

 

[brotherhrolf]

I would simply say dress conservatively and nicely.

And let me give you my observations about dress and the TLM. Way back when I was a kid in the late 50s and early 60s, the women watched what the other women wore like a hawk. Did you see that hat she wore? It didn’t match her gloves…and so on and so forth. (I know because I heard my mother’s comments). Or other things like wearing a white hat before Easter and after Labor Day.

So the “fashion police” sword swings both ways. It is certainly well and good to honor Our Lord by dressing appropriately but there is a fine line between dressing conservatively (i.e. modestly) and the dreaded fashion critics of my childhood. Our Lord by word and deed was more concerned about the raiment which clothes our souls than the raiment which clothes our bodies.

 

[Margaret33]

Do you have any doctrinal support for this assertion?

I was taught growing up that you did not go to a Catholic Mass without wearing a skirt or dress and that you had to wear something on your head… I know I have it in either a book or article around here somewhere, will find and post once relocated. Can’t say much for how things are done now though, others are you’re best bet for that… I still wear skirts/dresses just because some traditions are ingrained in me, but I don’t cover my head because no one else does. But I don’t go to a TLM so it may not mean a whole lot (not by choice, circumstances)…

 

[BobP123]

AJV,

just to make sure we are on the same page…i’m not including the changes after V2. i’m referring of the changes up to the 1962 missal.

there were changes to the order of holy week in 1955, if i’m not mistaken. that was pretty major.

i think most traditional catholics would agree that a priest in the decades immediately preceding Pp St Gregory could walk into a MAss offerred according to the 1962 missal and feel at home. were he to walk into a typical NO mass, he would not.

Those changes put into place in 1955 (when the Pope was sick) were by none other than Bugnini, the major fabricator of the NO.

I still remember that one well.

 

[BobP123]

Oh, my 16 year old son wouldl LOVE it, he is the kid who cringes at the music in many Parishes, likes his music at home to be Rock and Roll but his Mass to be incense and bells with a chior and no hand holding.

Problem is, he has very long hair - and he does not wear ties. I have worn one skirt in the past 4 years, I wear dress slacks to work and to every “formal” event. From what I read here, DH would be the only one who would not booted at the door for dress code violations

When we used to have 4 Masses every weekday prior to VII, hardly anyone noticed what anyone else was wearing and people were dropping in, if only for a few minutes out of their busy workday. Why should it be different now?

 

[trc121805]

At my FSSP parish in western Canada you will see a wide variety of styles of dress. Some women wear pants, some wear skirts/dresses; some women cover their heads, others don’t. Some of the women who wear pants cover their heads and some of the ones who wear skirts/dresses don’t. Some of the men come in suits, others come in far more casual attire. The teens and kids also run the gamut of style as well. There’s a real mixture. As far as I know, no one makes anyone feel uncomfortable about what they wear. I echo what brotherhrolf says, ‘dress conservatively and nicely’, and you can’t go wrong.

How we dress has some importance, but from reading a lot of posts on this message board and others, a few people put a lot of emphasis on the importance of it. More important is the state of your soul. :twocents:

Jennifer

 

[Margaret33]

I was taught growing up that you did not go to a Catholic Mass without wearing a skirt or dress and that you had to wear something on your head… I know I have it in either a book or article around here somewhere, will find and post once relocated. Can’t say much for how things are done now though, others are you’re best bet for that… I still wear skirts/dresses just because some traditions are ingrained in me, but I don’t cover my head because no one else does. But I don’t go to a TLM so it may not mean a whole lot (not by choice, circumstances)…

Keep in mind this was originally posted in a Traditional forum, and I tend to lean that way

Some links: (keep in mind these are not canon law, just illustrating that this opinion is out there)
catholicplanet.com/women/dress.htm
catholicapologetics.info/morality/modesty/dress.htm
newadvent.org/summa/3169.htm

An example of one Catholic Churche’s dress code:
cmri.org/msmparish.html

These are rather hard-lined opinions, and there are differing opinions out there. My suggestion for a woman who isn’t sure - Either: 1) Go in a skirt for the first time just to be safe, if you see others wearing pants, then you will know what to where next time. or: 2) Call the church office you plan to attend and just ask… it can’t hurt!

 

[ctos]

if wearing pants gets them what they want without them having to bother me for it, then I’m fine with that, as long as I can get my errands done, and do my work, in peace and quiet.

Although what I really think is that when I wear pants, they don’t even see me as a sex object at all.

I don’t think it will do any good to point it out but: This manifests a contradictory stance. The pants-are-okay argument rests partly on an assumption that they are not over-exposing. But in fact, here you have just admitted that wearing pants exposes so that oglers can ogle without pestering.

Pants are egalitarian and over-exposing. They are a bad example to young women who manifestly are, and enjoy being, perceived as sex objects. It is a shame that in the Church today there is insufficient attention paid to encouraging modesty and decorum. It’s part of why people flee to chapels.

 

[lucybeebee]

I don’t think it will do any good to point it out but: This manifests a contradictory stance. The pants-are-okay argument rests partly on an assumption that they are not over-exposing. But in fact, here you have just admitted that wearing pants exposes so that oglers can ogle without pestering.

Pants are egalitarian and over-exposing. They are a bad example to young women who manifestly are, and enjoy being, perceived as sex objects. It is a shame that in the Church today there is insufficient attention paid to encouraging modesty and decorum. It’s part of why people flee to chapels.

Maybe it’s just me being stupid, but what exactly are pants supposed to be exposing? I honestly don’t understand.

 

[ctos]

They dramatically expose almost the entirety of the lower half of the feminine form. Sometimes even the vulva are exposed. Undergarments are routinely exposed. It’s no use saying that your pants aren’t like that, because your pants are an example. The younger women see no reason to dress appropriately if their elders are failing in this regard.

But more generally speaking, let me ask this: Whose job is it to correct women when they are mistaken about something? I just don’t understand this. Unilaterally they have decided to dress in ever more provocative ways, and they have thrown aside the veil too. Whose job is it to say something? How is it possible to gain any traction on these kinds of questions? What stops the train? The clergy? Is it the job of the priesthood to remind people about what they must do to be sanctified? If Novus Ordo priests would tell people the truth, there would be less fleeing to the chapels. People crave the truth, even when they won’t admit it.

The problems with women wearing pants are so extreme and obvious, that it really is stupefying that Catholics are so diffident about this issue. It never ceases to surprise me. I mean no offense. I simply can’t believe how much discrepancy there is between what is obviously true, and how people actually behave.