Arguing as in asserting a point, not fighting.
I understand that and I generally agree. I just think that after a certain point it becomes almost silly (shoulders, even upper arms etc). I can’t possibly address every guy’s weak spots.
The trouble is many of us feel that our existence in church in something other than a muumuu is “showing off”. We’re not trying to show off so much as be able to attend church without there being a constant focus on whether we’ve done enough to remove the temptation that we represent by merely existing.
I would say that much of the response is that you are missing the struggles that women have. And that’s leading you to see simply telling women to cover up more as minor or essentially harmless, when it is not.
I’m not saying this to be reactionary but instead to report what I saw on Twitter. It went viral because some were outraged that a woman at Mass would be told to cover her shoulders AND some were outraged that anyone would question a priest’s take on modesty. It honestly went both ways and many self-identified traditional Catholics really helped to propel the argument. Then Fr. Cusick left Twitter and loads of people claimed that his account was forcefully closed because he had “spoken the truth” (it wasn’t).I’m a little late to this party, but I’m well aware of what happened. I’m shocked by all the backlash. I wonder how this went so viral?
Seeing all the feminists go nuts against purity is saddening, but not unexpected. Maybe they should ask men for their opinion about how it affects men before they simply say that how they dress doesn’t matter. Who am I kidding? Like that will ever happen.
On the other hand, I do think that the tweet was a bit much. Shoulders? I mean… come on. Are we going to start talking about ankles and collarbones too? Maybe I’m a bit desensitized, because I saw much worse at my college parish back in the day. But still, shoulders doesn’t seem to me like the hill to die on, you know?
Of course not, because with a smokey eye one does a nude lip, or with a red lip one dues a nude eye.
Based on your reasoning GordonP, it’s OK to have ‘Wordly Feel Good Views’ on top of original Church teachings. This way of thinking leads to further deterioration of Church ‘Virtue Teachings’ which results in bad changes such as, “Why not eat as you say Prayers during the meal”? Or “Why say Prayers prior to eating the meal at all”? You falsely accuse me of being ‘Uncharitable’ because I refuse to follow your ‘Worldly Views’ of the Church…I reject that position as well. God bless you and have a good day.SeekSalvation:
You are being uncharitable by assuming that because they are not dressed to your personal standards, they “clearly don’t respect the Church”. The fact that they are showing up for Mass at all proves otherwise. If they “clearly didn’t respect the Church”, they wouldn’t be at Mass in the first place.
And if you make them feel uncomfortable, they might well decide to stop coming to Mass altogether, so that you can enjoy Mass in solitude.
Nobody likes being around prudes and nitpickers, and a congregation that gains a reputation of being a bunch of prudes and nitpickers is doomed to extinction.
Maybe the issue is that some people here consider such thoughts as sinful. I don’t think so. If one starts having thoughts that are impure one should redirect the mind to think about something else. It’s not that difficult.
What I mean is that for men, parts of a woman’s body are things that they do like but should still use custody of the eyes.Benjinho:
Uhhh…what are parts of a woman’s body that are for men?
