Clothes at Mass

  • Thread starter Thread starter foolishmortal
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
LilyM said:
We dress up for other mortal persons because they, being mortal, have a tendency to judge us based on a) first impressions and b) the way we dress.

Jesus and God the Father, being God, have no such weaknesses of perception that need to be a consideration - they see and read our hearts and souls. We look the same to them dressed in our pyjamas in the morning or dolled up in a ball gown. I don’t wear pyjamas to Mass purely out of deference to the other people who would be scandalised if I did. And I’m sure, if my soul is at rights, I will look as beautiful as the lilies of the field that Jesus spoke of. And didn’t he tell us specifically NOT to worry about what to wear?

Giving of our money to beautify a church is one thing - that Church is a dedicated house of God, and ideally no-one should even know that we contributed a cent so the glory is purely His. But if we wear nice clothes, in all honesty it is for ourselves and something we alone benefit from, not God.
Click to expand...
Weak!
 
Sword_Brethren said:
Why not then go to Holy Mass naked? God only sees your heart.
Click to expand...
That’s mighty sarcastic regarding an issue of reverence.

I understand LilyM’s argument without any reservation. God does indeed see our hearts and so other parishoners who see our attire as well as “knowing” us. I’ve never noticed anyone dressed inappropriately for Mass and I’ve belonged to parishes that were affluent and to parishes that were very poor. I doubt that anyone has noticed what I wear beyond the time of my childhood and teenage years. At my age and in my health, it’s great to be able to be at Mass!
 
LilyM said:
We dress up for other mortal persons because they, being mortal, have a tendency to judge us based on a) first impressions and b) the way we dress.

Jesus and God the Father, being God, have no such weaknesses of perception that need to be a consideration - they see and read our hearts and souls. We look the same to them dressed in our pyjamas in the morning or dolled up in a ball gown. I don’t wear pyjamas to Mass purely out of deference to the other people who would be scandalised if I did. And I’m sure, if my soul is at rights, I will look as beautiful as the lilies of the field that Jesus spoke of. And didn’t he tell us specifically NOT to worry about what to wear?

Giving of our money to beautify a church is one thing - that Church is a dedicated house of God, and ideally no-one should even know that we contributed a cent so the glory is purely His. But if we wear nice clothes, in all honesty it is for ourselves and something we alone benefit from, not God.
Click to expand...
Did you read this link I posted?:
traditioninaction.org/Cul…tue_Plinio.htm

It is worth your while to read it. I have found many today have a misguided opinion and seem to speak for God Almighty. The old novus ordo chestnut that God doesn’t care how we look is misguided and misconstrued. A perfect example is given in one of the above posts where the woman in the dress looked fine until the sunlight shone through and without a slip, it didn’t fulfill the standard of modesty, thus she became unwittingly an occasion to others to sin. This exemplifies why it is important to dress well, to think of the details, and to just plain “know better”. Our society has slipped so far down the ladder of propriety that many today just dress poorly or sloppily through no fault of their own other than they just haven’t been taught right. Mankind should always strive to better themselves, not just shrug it off with poor excuses.
 
catharina said:
That’s mighty sarcastic regarding an issue of reverence.

I understand LilyM’s argument without any reservation. God does indeed see our hearts and so other parishoners who see our attire as well as “knowing” us. I’ve never noticed anyone dressed inappropriately for Mass and I’ve belonged to parishes that were affluent and to parishes that were very poor. I doubt that anyone has noticed what I wear beyond the time of my childhood and teenage years. At my age and in my health, it’s great to be able to be at Mass!
Click to expand...
I did not find that statement at all sarcastic, rather, it is a conclusion drawn to the lame argument that God “sees only our hearts”. Really, it shoots holes in that argument big time. And to begin with, how can one be so bold as to presume they know what God is thinking?
 
piouswoman said:
I did not find that statement at all sarcastic, rather, it is a conclusion drawn to the lame argument that God “sees only our hearts”. Really, it shoots holes in that argument big time. And to begin with, how can one be so bold as to presume they know what God is thinking?
Click to expand...
God sees first and last into our hearts. It is by love that we are judged not by the standards of common fashion. I recall in my childhood and teen years that all women wore hats to church, whether to Mass or for a simple visit. Many (American) parishes had devout and elderly female immigrants who stayed with their homeland’s custom of wearing veils for the same purpose. There was never any argument or finger-pointing about who was or wasn’t dressed properly. All were dressed properly for the time and place. The new Code of Canon Law is a new coda replacing the coda of 1917 that required headcoverings for women in the Church. It is perfectly clear to me that when one dresses modestly in clean attire, then one is following God’s “thinking” or more precisely, following God’s will. God most definitely sees all - including any “holier than Rome” fantasy that is hidden in some hearts. The pre-Novo Ordus is no different from now. Then women might choose to wear hats, scarves, chapel veils, half- veils, mantillas and simple wool (or cotton) shawls. Now women might or might not choose to wear a headcovering. If one is dressed modestly in clean clothes, then one is very well-dressed.
 
catharina said:
God sees first and last into our hearts. It is by love that we are judged not by the standards of common fashion. I recall in my childhood and teen years that all women wore hats to church, whether to Mass or for a simple visit. Many (American) parishes had devout and elderly female immigrants who stayed with their homeland’s custom of wearing veils for the same purpose. There was never any argument or finger-pointing about who was or wasn’t dressed properly. All were dressed properly for the time and place. The new Code of Canon Law is a new coda replacing the coda of 1917 that required headcoverings for women in the Church. It is perfectly clear to me that when one dresses modestly in clean attire, then one is following God’s “thinking” or more precisely, following God’s will. God most definitely sees all - including any “holier than Rome” fantasy that is hidden in some hearts. The pre-Novo Ordus is no different from now. Then women might choose to wear hats, scarves, chapel veils, half- veils, mantillas and simple wool (or cotton) shawls. Now women might or might not choose to wear a headcovering. If one is dressed modestly in clean clothes, then one is very well-dressed.
Click to expand...
There are those that will argue, and rightfully so, that the error filled new Code of Canon Law, should never of replaced the 1917 Code of Canon Law to begin with.
There is a struggle going on right now within the church, it began after Vatican II when the traditionalists rejected the revolution, and it is still going on today.
If you wish to accuse those who understand the meaning of veiling and the traditional doctrines of the church by saying such things as “holier than Rome fantasies hidden in some hearts”, it exposes you as a very narrow-minded person who really and truly must have great animosity towards those who do take their faith seriously, and who wish to live their faith according to traditional Catholic doctrine, just as their ancestors, all of the popes, bishops, doctors of the church, saints and martyrs, have throughout the ages, and who reject the novelties and changes that have brought nothing but divisiveness and troubles to the conciliar church.
 
Oh, I forgot to say that this line:

“God sees first and last into our hearts. It is by love that we are judged not by the standards of common fashion.”

…is so modernist in its roots, so permeated with the “love, love, love” mentality from the hippie era, and has been so hammered into the minds of the average Catholic today, that I can hardly stand it. I really take issue with that sickly sweet, politically correct, “I don’t want to offend anyone” and “everyone can invent their own rules” type of Catholicism.
 
piouswoman said:
Oh, I forgot to say that this line:

“God sees first and last into our hearts. It is by love that we are judged not by the standards of common fashion.”

…is so modernist in its roots, so permeated with the “love, love, love” mentality from the hippie era, and has been so hammered into the minds of the average Catholic today, that I can hardly stand it. I really take issue with that sickly sweet, politically correct, “I don’t want to offend anyone” and “everyone can invent their own rules” type of Catholicism.
Click to expand...
Great post. Be careful to tone down anything that might be too offensive, because I love reading your stuff and would hate to see you banned.
 
piouswoman said:
There are those that will argue, and rightfully so, that the error filled new Code of Canon Law, should never of replaced the 1917 Code of Canon Law to begin with.
Click to expand...
That is your OPINION.

The Church stands. The Holy Father is alive and well. Rome exists. The Vatican has not fallen to dissenters of either extreme. Deo gratias!
 
piouswoman said:
Oh, I forgot to say that this line:

“God sees first and last into our hearts. It is by love that we are judged not by the standards of common fashion.”

…is so modernist in its roots, so permeated with the “love, love, love” mentality from the hippie era, and has been so hammered into the minds of the average Catholic today, that I can hardly stand it. I really take issue with that sickly sweet, politically correct, “I don’t want to offend anyone” and “everyone can invent their own rules” type of Catholicism.
Click to expand...
It was Jesus, not a hippie, Who said we are to "feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, to clothe the naked " and so forth and that in doing so, we doing so to Him. He did not say we shall be judged as fit to enter heaven based upon a headcovering or neatly ironed and impressive clothing worn to Church. I could take offense at your personal judgment of me but I don’t actually care about it. Please, however, don’t twist the words of Christ the Lord. When you do THAT type of twisting, yes, I do take offense.
 
Miles_Mariae said:
Great post. Be careful to tone down anything that might be too offensive, because I love reading your stuff and would hate to see you banned.
Click to expand...
I guess then you’re fine with “piouswoman” being offensive as long as she is not “too offensive.” Is that your point?
 
catharina said:
I guess then you’re fine with “piouswoman” being offensive as long as she is not “too offensive.” Is that your point?
Click to expand...
On the contrary, “offensive” is often used to describe a subjective judgment, and I was advising piouswoman not to appear overly offensive to others, lest they deliver her to the moderators. Of course, if it is a tradeoff between being offensive and failing to proclaim the truth, then my advice may not hold. Such is the nature of courage.

Often, the truth will sound offensive to those who do not believe in it. The Church is a sign of contradiction in the modern world.
 
Miles_Mariae said:
On the contrary, “offensive” is often used to describe a subjective judgment, and I was advising piouswoman not to appear overly offensive to others, lest they deliver her to the moderators. Of course, if it is a tradeoff between being offensive and failing to proclaim the truth, then my advice may not hold. Such is the nature of courage.

Often, the truth will sound offensive to those who do not believe in it. The Church is a sign of contradiction in the modern world.
Click to expand...
Choose one (or choose several):

Dictionary.com Unabridged
–adjective 1. causing resentful displeasure; highly irritating, angering, or annoying: offensive television commercials.
2. unpleasant or disagreeable to the sense: an offensive odor.
3. repugnant to the moral sense, good taste, or the like; insulting: an offensive remark; an offensive joke.
4. pertaining to offense or attack: the offensive movements of their troops.
5. characterized by attack; aggressive: offensive warfare.
–noun 6. the position or attitude of aggression or attack: to take the offensive.
7. an aggressive movement or attack: a carefully planned naval offensive.

How about the issue being the one that pertains: that is, insulting in regard to statements pertaining to morality. Only “piouswoman” herself could deliver herself to moderators. Only her own extravagently offensive statements could take her there.
 
I have explained my reasoning and have no interest in this petty argument. I do not retract my praise for piouswoman’s post.

Enjoy your evening (day).
 
Miles_Mariae said:
I have explained my reasoning and have no interest in this petty argument. I do not retract my praise for piouswoman’s post.

Enjoy your evening (day).
Click to expand...
As long as you “feel” comfortable with your praise of “piouswoman’s” uncharitable declarations, then so be it. I guess.
 
Sword_Brethren said:
Why not then go to Holy Mass naked? God only sees your heart.
Click to expand...
Reductio ad absurdam.

He only sees who I AM - and yes, He also sees me when I AM naked. And guess what, I look the same to Him naked or clothed, just as Adam and Eve did in the garden. Their new clothing didn’t hide their shame or their sinful souls from Him. Neither did St John the Baptist’s shabby camel hair detract a single iota from his sanctity.

It’s not about God loving me no matter what - it’s about God KNOWING who I am no matter what, and me being the same person in His eyes, for better or worse, no matter what I wear.

I’d love to be able to imagine that a snazzy new set of threads would make Him look more favourably on me, since it’s much easier to buy new clothing than reform my soul. But I cannot bring myself to think that God cares so much about clothing as we do.

As for the good folks around me, sadly, they DON’T see only my heart. And I have to live among them. THAT’S why I don’t go anywhere naked - I dress so as to neither scandalise nor be an occasion of sin to them. I doubt severely that my wearing jeans (no, they’re neither tight nor lowcut, nor ripped nor dirty, nor embroidered with offensive words) is at all an occasion of sin for anyone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top