Appropriate Dress For Women

  • Thread starter Thread starter xixxvmcm85
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
:hug1:
Oh, how lovely you are!
Oh, thank you 😊

I wish to cover for God, Jesus, and Mother Mary - all out of respect and love, and also to serve as a reminder of my faith. I am considering on wearing a head-band/snood like covering through my RCIA, and then at Easter Vigil wear a veil for the first time. šŸ™‚
 
And does veiling mean that one is submissive to a man?
I will NOT be submissive to a man! I don’t care if I have a veil, a hat, or just hair!

No man is the boss of me!

(before anyone gets all up in arms, I am widowed, so I truly AM the head of my household! And truly, I will not be submissive to any man!)
 
I will NOT be submissive to a man! I don’t care if I have a veil, a hat, or just hair!

No man is the boss of me!

(before anyone gets all up in arms, I am widowed, so I truly AM the head of my household! And truly, I will not be submissive to any man!)
It was only asked because we literally got told that all Catholic women should be (the thread has since been deleted due to some posts had become insulting). So we wanted something to back us up.
 
Thank you so much for the replies. Seems to me that most of us are on the same page (or maybe just the same chapter) of the skirts/pants part. Skirts=good, though sometimes just not reasonable.

The head covering question still lingers though, and I wonder what the answer may be. Now that I think about it, I seem to recall this as a Vatican II issue, where a new set of regulations were put out, and that did not include head coverings, but people did not know if the lack of addressing head coverings meant they were no longer required, or no changes had been made. I could be wrong.

rook476: Thank you for the links. Those are lovely. I like how they cover, and will remind me to be prayerful, without disracting others.

Let me clarify my views on skirts. I think we should dress femininly, and skirts are, I feel, the most effective way to do this. I’m up north too, like many of you, and know that sometimes skirts are unreasonable. Certainly, I wouldn’t want to be in some of jamanne’s situations in a dress :p. However, much more can be done in a long skirt than most women will admit. I have worn a long near ankle length swim skirt swimming, and have had no problems.šŸ˜‰
 
Thank you so much for the replies. Seems to me that most of us are on the same page (or maybe just the same chapter) of the skirts/pants part. Skirts=good, though sometimes just not reasonable.

The head covering question still lingers though, and I wonder what the answer may be. Now that I think about it, I seem to recall this as a Vatican II issue, where a new set of regulations were put out, and that did not include head coverings, but people did not know if the lack of addressing head coverings meant they were no longer required, or no changes had been made. I could be wrong.

rook476: Thank you for the links. Those are lovely. I like how they cover, and will remind me to be prayerful, without disracting others.

Let me clarify my views on skirts. I think we should dress femininly, and skirts are, I feel, the most effective way to do this. I’m up north too, like many of you, and know that sometimes skirts are unreasonable. Certainly, I wouldn’t want to be in some of jamanne’s situations in a dress :p. However, much more can be done in a long skirt than most women will admit. I have worn a long near ankle length swim skirt swimming, and have had no problems.šŸ˜‰
As far as swimming…just make sure you are in a pool…not a river or an ocean where the currents or undertow can quickly make a long skirt a very dangerous situation! Oh, and be careful with the pool filter and a long skirt!

An important thing to remember (for all of us) is not to ā€œmake an idolā€ out of wearing skirts/dresses. I have seen this all too frequently with Protestant Fundamentalists and Pentecostals…and sadly, some Traditional Catholics.
 
From what I understand, veiling is a matter of discipline, not rule or law. And disciplines are also not moral commands, which means that they can be changed. At least, that is what has been explained to me.

If there’s one thing that I have learned about this issue, it’s just that we have to be careful to not focus so much on the ā€œruleā€ or ā€œlawā€ of an issue because it can get very divisive.
 
Thank you so much for the replies. Seems to me that most of us are on the same page (or maybe just the same chapter) of the skirts/pants part. Skirts=good, though sometimes just not reasonable.

The head covering question still lingers though, and I wonder what the answer may be. Now that I think about it, I seem to recall this as a Vatican II issue, where a new set of regulations were put out, and that did not include head coverings, but people did not know if the lack of addressing head coverings meant they were no longer required, or no changes had been made. I could be wrong.

rook476: Thank you for the links. Those are lovely. I like how they cover, and will remind me to be prayerful, without disracting others.

Let me clarify my views on skirts. I think we should dress femininly, and skirts are, I feel, the most effective way to do this. I’m up north too, like many of you, and know that sometimes skirts are unreasonable. Certainly, I wouldn’t want to be in some of jamanne’s situations in a dress :p. However, much more can be done in a long skirt than most women will admit. I have worn a long near ankle length swim skirt swimming, and have had no problems.šŸ˜‰
I LOVE the long skirts the Muslim girls at my Uni wear…so feminine. I wonder where they get them from sometimes…lol. I only say that, cos there are not many ā€œwesternā€ girls who wear long skirts during summer…it is normally short shorts - I wear them I admit, but always with totally black stockings - so no skin showing…and I only wear them when it is really hot here in Australia :cool: i do try to be modest in the Aussie heat. LOL
 
It was only asked because we literally got told that all Catholic women should be (the thread has since been deleted due to some posts had become insulting). So we wanted something to back us up.
I quoted scripture which states "1 Peter 3:5 For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands: 6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters [1] ye are, as long as ye do well, "

Unfortunately by expressing this and other supporting sentiments I was accused of being personally insulting. I deny this and if it can be pointed out that i was personally insulting then I will certainly apologise. Women of today are victims of the modern popular culture as are we all to one extent or another. I mean no offense to women who have been caught in the snare of feminism, but I do nevertheless call upon women everywhere to submit to their husbands and obey them as the apostle himself commanded.

Clearly it is easier to accuse me of being personally insulting towards women than it is to address the scriptures and issues which I raised. At no point did anybody provide an alternative interpretation of 1 Peter 3:5.
 
I quoted scripture which states "1 Peter 3:5 For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands: 6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters [1] ye are, as long as ye do well, "

Unfortunately by expressing this and other supporting sentiments I was accused of being personally insulting. I deny this and if it can be pointed out that i was personally insulting then I will certainly apologise. Women of today are victims of the modern popular culture as are we all to one extent or another. I mean no offense to women who have been caught in the snare of feminism, but I do nevertheless call upon women everywhere to submit to their husbands and obey them as the apostle himself commanded.

Clearly it is easier to accuse me of being personally insulting towards women than it is to address the scriptures and issues which I raised. At no point did anybody provide an alternative interpretation of 1 Peter 3:5.
Please do not start it here.
 
From what I understand, veiling is a matter of discipline, not rule or law. And disciplines are also not moral commands, which means that they can be changed. At least, that is what has been explained to me.

If there’s one thing that I have learned about this issue, it’s just that we have to be careful to not focus so much on the ā€œruleā€ or ā€œlawā€ of an issue because it can get very divisive.
Just to clarify, matter of disciplines can be rules of law. But the Church can change her mind about such disciplines and no longer enforce such a discipline. What the Church cannot change are essential traditions. For example, the matter of Sacraments cannot be changed. The Eucharist will always be wheat bread and grape wine. Liturgy should always have a Gospel reading. Those aren’t merely disciplines but essential basics on how we worship and practice our faith. Thing like veiling is disciplinary.

We should always follow the rule or law because we are bound to it. But we should be careful to understand which laws are in force, and which are not. Some people would say certain laws in the past are still in force when they are not. Like civil laws, if a law carries no force, we are not bound to obey it.
 
Please do not start it here.
I admit that I pushed to hard on the other thread and I will let it drop now. All the best with your RCIA program and I am certainly pleased that you are keen to dress well for the Lord. I could have done more in the other thread to commend you for that.
 
I quoted scripture which states "1 Peter 3:5 For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands: 6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters [1] ye are, as long as ye do well, "

Unfortunately by expressing this and other supporting sentiments I was accused of being personally insulting. I deny this and if it can be pointed out that i was personally insulting then I will certainly apologise. Women of today are victims of the modern popular culture as are we all to one extent or another. I mean no offense to women who have been caught in the snare of feminism, but I do nevertheless call upon women everywhere to submit to their husbands and obey them as the apostle himself commanded.

Clearly it is easier to accuse me of being personally insulting towards women than it is to address the scriptures and issues which I raised. At no point did anybody provide an alternative interpretation of 1 Peter 3:5.
And men need to ā€œgive up themselvesā€ for their wife…just as Christ gave himself up for the Church…even unto death. That doesn’t always mean a ā€œphysical deathā€ā€¦but a ā€œdeathā€ to selfish desires and wants. He needs to put her needs above his own. Hence, ā€œeven unto deathā€! I know you didn’t quote Ephesians here, but anytime men start quoting Sacred Scripture on verses such as the ones you did, in regards to what ā€œwomen are commanded to doā€; I feel the need to remind them about what THEY are commanded to do…since many seem to forget the exactly what Ephesians says about it.šŸ˜‰

Not saying you are guilty of any such thing…but we’ve had other posters on here in the past that were.
 
I admit that I pushed to hard on the other thread and I will let it drop now. All the best with your RCIA program and I am certainly pleased that you are keen to dress well for the Lord. I could have done more in the other thread to commend you for that.
Thank you šŸ™‚
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top