I would like to know who decided that female breasts are part of the “intimate centre of the person”, while male breasts are not. The more I think about it, the less I understand the difference.
Again, I want to know who decided this, and why only female breasts count.
I don’t understand why female breasts count as “private parts”, while male chests don’t. It seems like a cultural, not a moral, thing to me.
I agree- if we’re talking about America. (Though I still don’t understand why that is.) I’m under the impression that this ISN’T uniformly true of all cultures.
Dear Kamaduck,
Cordial greetings and a very good day. Thankyou for your response.
It is also indecent, dear friend, for a man to expose his bare chest to the gaze of others in public places, but in this thread it was female breasts that were specifically mentioned. Moreover, since women are manifestly more visual than men, discussions regarding modesty and decency have a tendency to revolve around them, but certainly men equally have a moral obligation to keep themselves adequately covered, so as not to incite unchaste thoughts.
Our Church, notwithstanding what some contemporary Catholics may assert to the contrary, has always taught that women (and men) should “adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety…which becometh women professing godliness” ((I Tim. 2: 9). In other words, dear friend, it has held that seemly attire befits men and women who profess Christ’s
holy religion. Clearly, men and women who shamefully expose chests and breasts to public view are failing to dress modestly with decency and propriety. However, needless to say, outward modesty which makes itself known in the way one dresses, must also be accompanied by inward purity and chastity, since the former would otherwise be of no account.
Whilst it is true, dear friend, that modesty in dress will always be expressed in a manner that is considered appropriate to the cultural and social climate of the time, exposing “intimate parts” which should not be unveiled is universally wrong and unseemly. Unless we view this whole issue of modesty in the light of the Fall and the entrance of Original Sin, we shall surely embrace erroneous and novel opinions that are more in tune with the present cultural and moral deterioration in our midst than with Catholic Church teaching. Sadly, this is precisely what is occuring in Western Catholicism today because worldly Catholics have steadfastly refused to resist the decadent trends of the Sixties permissive revolution.
When, dear friend, Adam and Eve rebelled against God, sin created a radical disorder within their souls and this meant that they were now under the influence of their disordered sexual passions and lust. This being the case, it is plainly evident that being scantily dressed is calculated to enflame those base passions, which are now subject to concupiscence or evil desire. Indeed, this is why St. Paul wrote as he did in the First Timothy passage which I cited earlier and why Holy Mother Church has always insisted that the faithful be adequately attired. Prior to the Sixties permissive revolution, when the Catholic moral sense was still strong and healthy and the faithful had an instinct for modesty, you would never have heard Catholics desperately trying to justify immodest vesture. Here is just a sample of the sort of teaching Catholics would hear in those more God-fearing and sober times when immodest vesture was not tolerated:
“One cannot sufficiently deplore the blindness of so many women of every age and station. Made foolish by the desire to please, they do not see to what degree the indecency of their clothing shocks every honest man and offends God. Most of them would have formerly blushed for such apparel as for a grave fault against Christian modesty. Now it does not suffice to exibit themselves on public thoroughfares; they do not fear to cross the threshold of churches, to assist in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and even to bear the seducing food of shameful passion to the Eucharistic Table, where one receives the Heavenly Author of Purity” (Pope Benedict XV,
Sa**cra Propediem, 1921).
What would the good Pope think were he alive today to witness our culture? Methinks, dear friend, that if he uttered these words now he would probably be branded a ‘Puritan prude’, or at least be charged with overscrupulosity. You will observe that ‘Christian modesty’ is assumed as a given here, no confusion about what it means to be modestly dressed or what is decent attire. Moreover, I find what Pope Benedict says still highly relevant, even more so given the decadent times in which our lot is cast. Yes, there really were the ‘good old days’ and the urgent need of the hour is to return to them without delay - “Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein” (Jer. 6: 16).
God bless and may you and all other contributors to this thread have a jolly splendid and relaxing weekend.
Warmest good wishes,
Portrait
Pax:tiphat:
