Is it a sin for women to wear bikinis?

[turtle18]

First off, I want to thank Little Soldier for answering my question. I don’t agree with your point but I am glad I have some frame of reference. I don’t see how certain situations of wearing a bikini would qualify as being immodest–for example if you have a scar or obese. Why does it matter if bikinis are not immodest? Some men acutally like obese women (yep, they exist and they are out there.) But I really think if someone has a scar, what is wrong with that? If your face was scarred, would you avoid leaving your house?

And to the previous poster who is comparing the American seashore to tribal African women, nope, I don’t buy that either. Tribal African women have not had the Gospel preached to them; therefore their cultural standard of going topless is not based on Judeo-Christian morals. America is a modernized society; most of our citizens live by the Bible and should act accordingly.

 

[BobObob]

And to the previous poster who is comparing the American seashore to tribal African women, nope, I don’t buy that either. Tribal African women have not had the Gospel preached to them; therefore their cultural standard of going topless is not based on Judeo-Christian morals. America is a modernized society; most of our citizens live by the Bible and should act accordingly.

I would bet that these tribal African women have had the gospel preached to them. Although there are remote cultures where the gospel hasn’t been preached at all, these are pretty rare given that Christianity is worldwide and found in every country.

Many cultures in which Christianity is prevalent have similar habits regarding dress.

The differences in the lack of dress between the US and tribal cultures is probably primarily due to economical reasons, rather than religious reasons.

My point is not to say that women should go around topless, but rather that the virtue of modesty entails following certain moral principles regarding dress, which can have very different applications in very different circumstances.

 

[BobObob]

America is a modernized society; most of our citizens live by the Bible and should act accordingly.

BTW, there’s nudity in the Bible (not just Adam and Eve).

It would take me forever to find every instance of nudity in Scriptures. However, Jesus didn’t condemn Peter for being naked outside. See John 21:7 (blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=21&v=1&t=KJV#top ) where it says “gar ēn gymnos” (“for he was naked”).

Make sure you know what is in the Bible before you consider something Biblical.

 

[Advocatus_Fidei]

Wearing a bikini is not compatible with been a Christian, the bikini is nothing more than underwear and is an utterly disgusting and immoral form of dress.

“One cannot sufficiently deplore the blindness of so many women of every age and station. Made foolish by a 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 formerly have blushed for such apparel as for a grave fault against Christian modesty. Now it does not suffice to exhibit themselves on public thoroughfares; they do not fear to cross the threshold of churches, to assist at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and even to bear the seducing food of shameful passions to the Eucharistic Table, where one receives the Heavenly Author of Purity.” Pope Benedict XV, Sacra Propediem , 1921.

 

[BobObob]

Wearing a bikini is not compatible with been a Christian, the bikini is nothing more than underwear and is an utterly disgusting and immoral form of dress.

“One cannot sufficiently deplore the blindness of so many women of every age and station. Made foolish by a 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 formerly have blushed for such apparel as for a grave fault against Christian modesty. Now it does not suffice to exhibit themselves on public thoroughfares; they do not fear to cross the threshold of churches, to assist at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and even to bear the seducing food of shameful passions to the Eucharistic Table, where one receives the Heavenly Author of Purity.” Pope Benedict XV, Sacra Propediem , 1921.

Ratzinger, in that quote, is talking about dress (or lack thereof) that plays a negative role with regard to the value of the human person. Again, John Paul II wrote:

“Immodesty is only present when nakedness plays a negative role with regard to the value of the person.”

 

[DoulaMama]

Here is just one site with documentation, there are tons more. catholicmodesty.com/Popesonmodesty.html
The standards aren’t binding as far as know, but they are there for women to measure up against when considering whether or not her dress is modest.

Why must the burqa always be brought up? The burqa covers from head to toe, no one said any such thing. I personally wear a swim shirt and swim shorts that go to my knee. That doesn’t keep with the standards I mentioned but I feel that as long as the upper leg/crotch area and cleavage are not exposed that it is modest for swimming. There are many options for truly modest swim wear.

I hope you don’t wear tank tops and shorts to Mass and confession! If not out of respect for the Blessed Sacrament at least dress modestly for your poor celibate priest!
I live in a place that sees 120 degree summers, I still wear ankle length skirts (linen and cotton knit are excellent fabrics for summer) with elbow length tops. I am often holding small children and know about those hot flashes! I actually feel cooler covered up than with the sun beating down on my skin.

I apologize for using such a strong word. It is hard to tell a person’s intent through typed words, but many of your posts on this thread seem to be seething. I also see a lot of me, me, me in your defenses and that is irksome. Especially on this topic because many Catholic women are so stuck in their ways and the standards set by the world that they dismiss the pleas from men to cover up and ignore what the Church has to say on the matter.

Wasn’t trying to be mean, just pointing out the “Me” mentality that is just too prevalent in the issue.
If you would die for Him, might you consider dying to yourself for Him and covering up?

May the Peace of Christ be with you too, sister.

Perhaps it would do all of us good to view the pictures and video of St Gianna Beretta Molla. What an inspiration for today’s women!!! I’ve seen pictures of her in dresses that were not floor or ankle length, in pants when she was downhill skiing or doing something that was not easily accomplished in a dress/skirt, and she did wear tops with short sleeves( above the elbow). I’ve also noticed that she did not have her head covered when she was going about her daily duties. Not only was she a wife and mother, she was a medical doctor! The child she gave up her own life for grew up to be a prolife medical doctor, as well. With St Gianna, we actually have a “modern” woman that the Holy Mother Church canonized as a Saint!!…why aren’t more faithful Catholic women following her example (in fashion as well as life)?

 

[Advocatus_Fidei]

Ratzinger, in that quote, is talking about dress (or lack thereof) that plays a negative role with regard to the value of the human person. Again, John Paul II wrote:

“Immodesty is only present when nakedness plays a negative role with regard to the value of the person.”

Bob you just made that up, you don’t even have the right pope and the words speak for themselves they do not need to be interpreted by you.

 

[lil_flower_luv]

What would Mary wear?

 

[DoulaMama]

What would Mary wear?

That’s really hard to answer…Our Blessed Mother lived in an era in which women’s live were quite different than today. While I wonder if I should even speculate how she would dress in today’s world, I would guess she would clothe herself in things similar to what St. Gianna Beretta Molla wore…and that’s exactly why I made a post about St Gianna (#166 of this thread)…she’s a canonized saint of the modern era and we have photos of her. She drove a car, went skiing, rock-climbing, took her children on picnics, went to dinners with her husband, rode a bicycle, etc. All things we “modern” women do. That’s why I referred to her as being a great and realistic example.

 

[lil_flower_luv]

That’s really hard to answer…Our Blessed Mother lived in an era in which women’s live were quite different than today. While I wonder if I should even speculate how she would dress in today’s world, I would guess she would clothe herself in things similar to what St. Gianna Beretta Molla wore…and that’s exactly why I made a post about St Gianna…she’s a canonized saint of the modern era and we have photos of her. She drove a car, went skiing, rock-climbing, took her children on picnics, went to dinners with her husband, rode a bicycle, etc. All things we “modern” women do. That’s why I referred to her as being a great and realistic example.

That’s great. Women striving for holiness should indeed try to emulate other holy women, especially our Blessed Mother which is why I mentioned her. Living in a different era has nothing to do with it. Should a woman who really wants to set an example and become Christ-like wear **anything **that is immodest? Thank you for your post.

 

[LittleSoldier]

I would…if any of them were relevant to the issue at hand.

You’re the one who made the statements I discussed. You must have thought they were relevant when you made them initially.

Didn’t you tell one poster that her attempts to improve her body were “so [she] could show off what [she] did”? Didn’t you imply that I want to dress like a stripper?

Do you deny these allegations?

If they weren’t relevant to the subject at hand why did you bring them up in the first place?

 

[Portrait]

Wearing a bikini is not compatible with been a Christian, the bikini is nothing more than underwear and is an utterly disgusting and immoral form of dress.

“One cannot sufficiently deplore the blindness of so many women of every age and station. Made foolish by a 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 formerly have blushed for such apparel as for a grave fault against Christian modesty. Now it does not suffice to exhibit themselves on public thoroughfares; they do not fear to cross the threshold of churches, to assist at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and even to bear the seducing food of shameful passions to the Eucharistic Table, where one receives the Heavenly Author of Purity.” Pope Benedict XV, Sacra Propediem , 1921.

Dear Advocatus Fidei,

Your quote from Pope Benedict XV is a reminder of more sober times when infractions against Christian modesty were taken a great deal more seriously than they are nowadays, when all manner of sophistry is employed to justify the wearing of indecorous apparel.

Our Church has spoken quite unequivocally on this matter:

“Modesty is decency. It inspires one’s choice of clothing” (CCC, para. 2523).

“Modesty inspires a way of life which makes it possible to resist the allurements of fashion and the pressures of prevailing idealogies” (CCC, para. 2523).

“Women should adorn themselves modestly and sensibly in seemly apparel” (St. Paul, I Tim. 2: 9).

(all emphases mine).

Surely these above citations are quite plain and unambiguous enough; how can mini-skirts, low cut garments revealing cleavage and bikini’s possibly fall under the heading of “seemly apparel” and modest attire, irrespective of any cultural considerations?

Incidently, the word modesty in the St. Paul quote above denotes a sense of shame and a recoiling from trespassing the boundaries of propriety. Thus it is manifestly obvious that a women’s clothing must be expressive of an interior modesty and of a sober and sane outlook upon life, in other words an outlook that is consonant with good taste and decency.

By wearing mini-skirts, bikini’s and other unseemly apparel a woman is, even if not intentionaly, dressing in a seductive manner and causing men to focus their attention upon her body rather than her persona. Moreover, she is most probably inflaming impure thoughts and being the occasion of sin in members of the opposite sex. (cf. St. Matt. 5: 28). We have to reckon with fallen human nature and the consequent propensity to sin that is in all of us, so let us, men and women, not unecessarily excite sinful desires in one another. Whilst it is true that each of us are responsible for ourselves as regards the resisting of temptation, let us, dearly beloved, not make it any more difficult than it already is by dressing seductively; let us protect “the intimate centre of the person” (by)" refusing to unveil that which should remain hidden" (CCC, para. 2521).

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

 

[LittleSoldier]

First off, I want to thank Little Soldier for answering my question. I don’t agree with your point but I am glad I have some frame of reference. I don’t see how certain situations of wearing a bikini would qualify as being immodest–for example if you have a scar or obese. Why does it matter if bikinis are not immodest? Some men acutally like obese women (yep, they exist and they are out there.) But I really think if someone has a scar, what is wrong with that? If your face was scarred, would you avoid leaving your house?

If an obese woman wears a bikini her adipose tissue drapes over the bottom part and covers it up. It makes her appear to be nude, at least from the bottom part of the top of the bikini down. That is immodest. I know there are some men who like obese women. I have a good friend who has been morbidly obese the entire time I have known her. A few years ago she married a man who is not overweight at all.

I didn’t equate having a scar to being obese. They are very different. If you read my post you’ll notice I didn’t even put “having a scar” in the part about what immodest dress is, in my opinion. I added it at the bottom simply to show that I don’t wear a bikini of any kind and that I wear a high-back tank style one piece swimsuit. I had the feeling that some people here were under the impression that I was wearing a bikini when I swim. I’ve already been told I want to dress like a stripper. The swimsuits I wear show less skin that most of the swimsuits that one can buy today. I’m sorry for my poor wording - I should have made that clear.

At first it didn’t matter to me if people saw my scar. Then I saw a woman entering a pool after me. It was a large therapy pool and I was walking around (which was my exercise). Every time I turned around I saw that she had been staring at my back. She would turn her head quickly. After this had happened about five times she left the pool and then came back wearing a tee-shirt. I was embarrassed. I thought she had seen my scar and probably had one too and wanted to cover it up because she thought mine was ugly. I was wearing a one piece swimsuit without a high back and I had about six inches of scar showing and I will admit it was an ugly scar as I’d had three surgeries and they kept cutting me open at the same site.

When I was in the hospital after the third surgery my Mom had to leave because she was becoming physically ill from looking at me. I don’t blame her or the woman who left to put on a tee-shirt. I don’t want to make other people uncomfortable about my scar, so I sometimes wear a tee-shirt, especially if there are children in the pool. I should mention I also have serious burns on my back and when people see them they tend to become a little upset.

I have very low self-esteem. When people react in a negative manner to my scar I become very uncomfortable. I don’t like it and it makes me become depressed. So instead of hiding in my house I dress in a way that doesn’t show the scar (or most of the scar) and then I don’t run the risk of being humiliated again by someone making a rude comment to me. Those sort of things hurt me very much. I’m working on this problem (with professional help) and I hope that someday I won’t feel so bad about something I have little control over.

And to the previous poster who is comparing the American seashore to tribal African women, nope, I don’t buy that either. Tribal African women have not had the Gospel preached to them; therefore their cultural standard of going topless is not based on Judeo-Christian morals. America is a modernized society; most of our citizens live by the Bible and should act accordingly.

Tribal African women have had the Gospel preached to them. The world is a very small place today. The women don’t cover their breasts because there is no reason for them to cover their breasts.

 

[JackQ]

I’m stumped on this one. But it’s probably a sin for a man to wear a bikini.

 

[PatriceA]

I’m stumped on this one. But it’s probably a sin for a man to wear a bikini.

HAHA! Thank you for injecting a little humor into this thread, it was needed.

 

[LittleSoldier]

Dear Advocatus Fidei,

Your quote from Pope Benedict XV is a reminder of more sober times when infractions against Christian modesty were taken a great deal more seriously than they are nowadays, when all manner of sophistry is employed to justify the wearing of indecorous apparel.

Our Church has spoken quite unequivocally on this matter:

“Modesty is decency. It inspires one’s choice of clothing” (CCC, para. 2523).

“Modesty inspires a way of life which makes it possible to resist the allurements of fashion and the pressures of prevailing idealogies” (CCC, para. 2523).

“Women should adorn themselves modestly and sensibly in seemly apparel” (St. Paul, I Tim. 2: 9).

(all emphases mine).

Surely these above citations are quite plain and unambiguous enough; how can mini-skirts, low cut garments revealing cleavage and bikini’s possibly fall under the heading of “seemly apparel” and modest attire, irrespective of any cultural considerations?

I beg to differ. Not one of the statements you posted actually states what types of clothing are worn by men and women in an immodest way. They are general statements and can be interpreted in many different ways.

Incidently, the word modesty in the St. Paul quote above denotes a sense of shame and a recoiling from trespassing the boundaries of propriety. Thus it is manifestly obvious that a women’s clothing must be expressive of an interior modesty and of a sober and sane outlook upon life, in other words an outlook that is consonant with good taste and decency.

That quote denotes no such thing! It doesn’t use or even imply “shame” or “recoiling from trespassing the boundaries of propriety.” All it states is that “women should adorn themselves modestly and sensibly in seemly apparel.” That’s it. How did you ever get from that simple little statement to “shame” and "recoiling from trespassing the boundaries of propriety? I think you’re reading a whole lot more into those quotes than what is actually there.

By wearing mini-skirts, bikini’s and other unseemly apparel a woman is, even if not intentionaly, dressing in a seductive manner and causing men to focus their attention upon her body rather than her persona. Moreover, she is most probably inflaming impure thoughts and being the occasion of sin in members of the opposite sex. (cf. St. Matt. 5: 28). We have to reckon with fallen human nature and the consequent propensity to sin that is in all of us, so let us, men and women, not unecessarily excite sinful desires in one another. Whilst it is true that each of us are responsible for ourselves as regards the resisting of temptation, let us, dearly beloved, not make it any more difficult than it already is by dressing seductively; let us protect “the intimate centre of the person” (by)" refusing to unveil that which should remain hidden" (CCC, para. 2521).

Mini skirts and bikinis are not unseemly apparel. You have your opinion and I have mine. I’m not going to worry about inciting “sinful desires” in men and I’m not going to change my opinion.

 

[BobObob]

BobObob;6749295:

Ratzinger, in that quote, is talking about dress (or lack thereof) that plays a negative role with regard to the value of the human person. Again, John Paul II wrote:

“Immodesty is only present when nakedness plays a negative role with regard to the value of the person.”

Bob you just made that up, you don’t even have the right pope and the words speak for themselves they do not need to be interpreted by you.

Made that up? That’s from page 190 of Love and Responsibility by John Paul II. It can be found via google books:

books.google.com/books?id=TNRY9HkssDQC&pg=PA190&lpg=PA190&dq=Immodesty+is+only+present+when+nakedness+plays+a+negative+role+with+regard+to+the+value+of+the+person&source=bl&ots=sx1m3FvXzV&sig=wgzaJUIPdG2RdObbN6__zVBuaLo&hl=en&ei=dywYTJTBDoGINv-FicYL&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CAYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Immodesty%20is%20only%20present%20when%20nakedness%20plays%20a%20negative%20role%20with%20regard%20to%20the%20value%20of%20the%20person&f=false

I’ll confess, I got one word (the word “only”) out of place due to getting that quote from another source. The exact quote is “Immodesty is present only when nakedness plays a negative role with regard to the value of the person.” See for yourself.

Regarding it being a different pope that the one you quoted, I’m not stupid, I knew that. The portion of what you quotes of Pope Benedict XV’s Sacra Propediem and what Pope John Paul II said in Love and Responsibility is compatible with each other.

After reading Sacra Propediem in its entirety from the Vatican website (vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xv/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xv_enc_06011921_sacra-propediem_en.html ) it is clear to me that he was referring to revealing the body in ways that would play a negative role with regard to the value of the person:

“Now there are two passions today dominant in the profound lawlessness of morals - an unlimited desire of riches and an insatiable thirst for pleasures. It is this which marks with a shameful stigma our epoch
…
From this point of view one cannot sufficiently deplore the blindness of so many women of every age and condition; made foolish by desire to please, they do not see to what a degree the in decency of their clothing shocks every honest man, and offends God…”

Also, the main point of this encyclical is to address the subject of the the third order of Saint Francis.

 

[LittleSoldier]

I’m stumped on this one. But it’s probably a sin for a man to wear a bikini.

 

[LittleSoldier]

Perhaps it would do all of us good to view the pictures and video of St Gianna Beretta Molla. What an inspiration for today’s women!!! I’ve seen pictures of her in dresses that were not floor or ankle length, in pants when she was downhill skiing or doing something that was not easily accomplished in a dress/skirt, and she did wear tops with short sleeves( above the elbow). I’ve also noticed that she did not have her head covered when she was going about her daily duties. Not only was she a wife and mother, she was a medical doctor! The child she gave up her own life for grew up to be a prolife medical doctor, as well. With St Gianna, we actually have a “modern” woman that the Holy Mother Church canonized as a Saint!!…why aren’t more faithful Catholic women following her example (in fashion as well as life)?

Thank you. I will check this out.

 

[BobObob]

Bob you just made that up, you don’t even have the right pope and the words speak for themselves they do not need to be interpreted by you.

Another note:

Everything that one reads must be interpreted. The words might be easy to interpret, but you can’t just say “the words speak for themselves.’ Many times it’s easy to get a different message from what the author was trying to present, or only a portion of the message. If you merely go with what you automatically pops in you head when you read something, you’ll sometimes misinterpret the author. Sometimes you’ll just be projecting your view, not the author’s view, onto whatever the author said (many do this with the Bible and the CCC). That’s always a good thing to keep in mind when reading anything.