Jewelry, makeup, etc. Vanity?

[Portrait]

Besides, the tatoo is a medium of a message in itself.

Dear PennyinCanada,

Cordial greetings and jolly good post.

Your remark above is bang on target. Tattoos convey a negative message in the eyes of the vast majority of respectable people, even if they are not necessarily professing Christians. They evoke in the mind an uncouth image and an ostentatiously assertive attitude that is very far removed from and diametrically opposed to the Catholic outlook on life. Like rock/pop music, tattoos are inseparably wedded to a certain philosophy of life that is usually very anti-establishment and disrespectful and it cannot shed this image.

In my experience, those who have tattoos, epecially young women, have a tendency to be very forward and un-lady-like. At any rate, there is a distinct absence of the “meek and quiet spirit” to which St. Peter refers in his First Epistle (I Pet. 3: 3,4) and that surely must be indicative of the interior character and make up of the woman.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

 

[EasterJoy]

Dear Easter Joy,

Cordial greetings and a very good day.

We are surely entitled to censure people’s actions and evaluate them in negative terms if we believe them to be wrong and not to accord with the sen**sus fidelium and general tenor of Catholic tradition. Tattoos, which is body mutiliation, does not square with this tradition but is rather a practice contrary to the profession of pious religion.

When our Lord says, “Judge not” in the Gospel, He decidedly does not mean that it is wrong or being a “busybody”, to pass an unfavourable judgment on the actions and opinions of others. Neither yet does He mean that it is wrong or uncharitable to reprove the sins or
faults of others until we ourselves are perfect and faultless. If that were the case it would be impossible to expose and denounce erroneous doctrine or condemn wrong living.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

Warmest

The Church does not teach that these things are inherently immoral; neither is the avoidance of make-up, jewelry, or tatoos a discipline currently being imposed on the faithful by anyone with the authority to impose such a thing. These things are allowed.

If you teach that these things are not allowed and judge others accordingly–as being “uncouth” or “impious” or what-have-you–then I fear you are judging people by your standards, not by what the Church has taught are God’s standards. Our Lord had several choice words about imposing human standards as if they were the standards of God. I don’t think I need to give you chapter nor verse on that.

With that end in view, I am not attempting to change your mind. If you feel that it is more charitable towards one’s fellow man to refrain from getting tatoos, then by all means, refrain from getting them. Let others know your thinking, and why you think your way is an edifying way. There is nothing wrong with that. If you want to make others aware that tatoos scandalize you, then say so, by all means.

Be very careful, though, that you make it very clear what is your opinion or the bidding of your particular charism and what are the teachings of the Church, OK? This is a very important boundary to hold in respect.

I think that letting this thread go might be most cordial and warm course of action at this point. We’ve all made ourselves clear by now, don’t you think? Do not toss your pearls before swine and shake the dust of that town from your feet in prostest…even with regards to a fully righteous call to repentance, Our Lord did not advocate in favor of beating a subject to death!

Let it go, and be at peace.

 

[EasterJoy]

Della!! You are not hoping for some Christian word war to erupt for entertainment’s sake, are you?

 

[pinctor]

Is this thread about ethics or etiquette?

 

[EasterJoy]

Is this thread about ethics or etiquette?

It is about the morality of enhancing one’s appearance or grooming or dressing according to fashion…is it an indulgence of vanity, per se?

Is is sinful for people to wear jewelry or makeup? What about piercings, or tattoos? I even wonder about growing beards sometimes. I have trouble seeing why these don’t amount to vanity, unless they are more or less demanded by custom.

IMHO, vanity is the desire to set yourself apart, to be noticed, to be made something of, to gain a particular esteem in someone else’s mind that you desire…be that a measure of fame or a measure of infamy. It is not the same thing as holding to the pretense that everyone ought to be indistinguishable in their looks, behavior, or accomplishments. It is not the same as pretending that there is no place for aesthetics in clothing or grooming. It does not imply that a person whose looks we happen to have noticed, whose looks bring about some internal reaction in us, has done anything wrong.

 

[EasterJoy]

It is not the same thing as holding to the pretense that everyone ought to be indistinguishable in their looks, behavior, or accomplishments. It is not the same as pretending that there is no place for aesthetics in clothing or grooming. It does not imply that a person whose looks we happen to have noticed, whose looks bring about some internal reaction in us, has done anything wrong.

In this part of the comment, the “it” I refer to is modesty, not vanity.

IMHO, modesty doesn’t make a lot of claims on what other people can and can’t do. Modesty is not offended by being around someone who is prettier or richer or smarter, not offended by beauty in clothing or architecture or sound, and just as unoffended when around someone who is not pretty, nor rich, nor intelligent, nor fashionable, nor polished in their looks or manners. Modesty dresses so as to be pleasant for others to look at, but not to be in some sort of a competition. Modesty doesn’t want to elicit either envy or pity. Modesty looks to give. Modesty doesn’t want to pretend it needs nothing from anyone, but admits that it benefits from the company and attentions of others. Modesty doesn’t look for other people to please him or her, but seeks what pleasure is to be had in the company of others, and uses generosity of heart to cover over what might jar his or her senses.

Modest people are easy to be around, easy to please and pleased when they are a pleasure for others. Vain people, OTOH, are high maintenance and difficult to please, hungry for approval and jealous lest they not get their share of it. The modest give attention to others easily, whereas the vain are easily irritated when others seek attention. Whereas the modest person is easy to satisfy, the vain are easily downcast when they are not noticed or don’t compare favorably to others. Vanity is inherently competitive, whereas modesty is inherently given to community and fraternity.

 

[Della]

Great post, Easter Joy! The best I’ve ever read on the topic. :clapping:

 

[JoArtist]

Dear JoArtist,

Hello again and thankyou for the above.

It is the actual historical context, in which the ceremonial precepts were given to Israel, that has ceased to exist. The whole biblical basis undergirding those temporary precepts, namely, sanctity and separation from the godless world, continues to be a highly relevant issue today for those of us who live under then new economy (cf. I Pet. 1: 15,16), perhaps more than ever it was in preceding generations.

Sorry, but tattoos have uncouth worldly associations and are therefore wholly inappropriate for those who profess godliness. Moreover, they are a product of our godless and brash culture which takes pleasure in promoting exhibitionism and unseemly customs, just as the heathen nations did back in the times of ancient Israel. As Israel was bidden to resist and and keep aloof from the practices of the heathen, so are we bidden to resist and keep aloof from the practices of modern heathenism. In both cases sanctity and separation from the world were and are the impetus behind the avoidance of such practices.

We are admonished in Sacred Scripture to “love not the world” and to keep ourselves “unstained from the world”. If that does not involve the pursuit of holiness and keeping our distance from the earthbound outlook of the godless world, then what does? In the midst of all the distracting and demoralizing influences of the world, the Catholic must keep himself pure by not embracing the customs and fashions with which he is surrounded. He must do this by continual rememberance of the demands of his all-holy God, especially the demand for sanctity and separation. He must keep himself “unstained from the world” that he may offer himself a holy and living sacrifice acceptable to God.

Our Church does call all of the faithful to a life of holiness and separation from the godless and brash world and specifically states that “The way of perfection passes by way of the Cross. * There is no holiness without renunciation and spiritual battle*”. (CCC, para. 2015, added emphasis mine). Thus, to this extent, Holy Mother Church does exhort us to avoid that which is contrary to our profession and to renounce all which would hinder us in our spiritual progress in “the way of perfection”.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

Again, you have failed to make a point. These associations you connect with tattoos are with culture that has faded out. Maybe there were these associations 30 years ago, but today they are not associated with such things unless done in extreme excess. But even with the body mod crowd, there are normal people living normal lives. your arguments are no longer relevant in our culture. You keep on saying the same things in different ways. If tattoos no longer have the associations with them that you say they do, then your arguments are null and void. Since these associations no longer exist, except in your mind, then your arguments are null and void. You just don’t like tattoos so you make outdated associations with them.

You think if the Church doesn’t speak on something it is your place to make the decision for everyone else whether it is moral or not. When the fact of the matter is it is NOT your place. Since reading other posts by you though, we would have this big long list of extra rules that really aren’t possible for many professionals, and frankly are legalistic.

 

[Portrait]

Again, you have failed to make a point. These associations you connect with tattoos are with culture that has faded out. Maybe there were these associations 30 years ago, but today they are not associated with such things unless done in extreme excess. But even with the body mod crowd, there are normal people living normal lives. your arguments are no longer relevant in our culture. You keep on saying the same things in different ways. If tattoos no longer have the associations with them that you say they do, then your arguments are null and void. Since these associations no longer exist, except in your mind, then your arguments are null and void. You just don’t like tattoos so you make outdated associations with them.

You think if the Church doesn’t speak on something it is your place to make the decision for everyone else whether it is moral or not. When the fact of the matter is it is NOT your place. Since reading other posts by you though, we would have this big long list of extra rules that really aren’t possible for many professionals, and frankly are legalistic.

Dear JoArtist,

Cordial greetings and a very good day. It had not been my intention to revisit this thread, as I feel that I have said all that I can possibly say upon the topic without repeating myself ad nauseum. My only reason for replying now (briefly) is out courtesy, since you have taken the trouble to submit a response and I did not wish you to think me impolite by ignoring you.

First, I have already addressed the issue of changing societal norms and that we Catholics do not take our cue from the godless secular culture and what it deems to be acceptable and normative (see # 33, especially). Thus it is immaterial that certain of the professional middle-classes or well-healed individuals are now having tattoos, for these people are living a life that is in complete conformity to the transient norm of worldly life, unlike the Catholic. Thus you would expect such men of the world to embrace and live by the debased standards of the world (cf. Ephesians 2: 1,2). However, the Catholic is surely striving not to be conformed to the world and, indeed, ought to be in active opposition to all its unholy and undignified practices and fashions.

Second, I challenge your assertion that tattoos no longer have the negative associations once attached to them. That assertion needs to be qualified by saying that they no longer have offensive associations for some earthbound men and women with low standards and some Catholics who have succumbed to the secular drift. However, men of good social standing, be they Christian or non-Christian, continue to find tattoos objectionable and unsightly and would still consider them off limits for respectable people. Incidently, appearances and habits are generally a good pointer as to the quality of a man’s interior disposition and his moral strength, or lack of it.

It is incumbent upon every God-fearing Catholic to call and encourage his brethren to a life of sanctity and separation from the godless world. The pursuit of holiness and self-denial have never been popular topics, especially with those who have adopted a hand in hand with the world type of religion, which considers any talk of rules or taboos to be pharisaical and indicatory of a ‘holier-than-thou’ mindset. This is especially true of the Laodicean times in which our lot is cast when so many modern day Catholics have opted for a ‘Catholicism Lite’.

This will be final post and I merely ask that you and others, who see nothing amiss or indecorous with tattoos, at least ponder all of my remarks upon the topic in this thread. Thankyou dear sister and God bless you.

Have a jolly splendid weekend, whatever you plan to do.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait:tiphat:

Pax

 

[JoArtist]

Dear JoArtist,

Cordial greetings and a very good day. It had not been my intention to revisit this thread, as I feel that I have said all that I can possibly say upon the topic without repeating myself ad nauseum. My only reason for replying now (briefly) is out courtesy, since you have taken the trouble to submit a response and I did not wish you to think me impolite by ignoring you.

First, I have already addressed the issue of changing societal norms and that we Catholics do not take our cue from the godless secular culture and what it deems to be acceptable and normative (see # 33, especially). Thus it is immaterial that certain of the professional middle-classes or well-healed individuals are now having tattoos, for these people are living a life that is in complete conformity to the transient norm of worldly life, unlike the Catholic. Thus you would expect such men of the world to embrace and live by the debased standards of the world (cf. Ephesians 2: 1,2). However, the Catholic is surely striving not to be conformed to the world and, indeed, ought to be in active opposition to all its unholy and undignified practices and fashions.

Second, I challenge your assertion that tattoos no longer have the negative associations once attached to them. That assertion needs to be qualified by saying that they no longer have offensive associations for some earthbound men and women with low standards and some Catholics who have succumbed to the secular drift. However, men of good social standing, be they Christian or non-Christian, continue to find tattoos objectionable and unsightly and would still consider them off limits for respectable people. Incidently, appearances and habits are generally a good pointer as to the quality of a man’s interior disposition and his moral strength, or lack of it.

It is incumbent upon every God-fearing Catholic to call and encourage his brethren to a life of sanctity and separation from the godless world. The pursuit of holiness and self-denial have never been popular topics, especially with those who have adopted a hand in hand with the world type of religion, which considers any talk of rules or taboos to be pharisaical and indicatory of a ‘holier-than-thou’ mindset. This is especially true of the Laodicean times in which our lot is cast when so many modern day Catholics have opted for a ‘Catholicism Lite’.

This will be final post and I merely ask that you and others, who see nothing amiss or indecorous with tattoos, at least ponder all of my remarks upon the topic in this thread. Thankyou dear sister and God bless you.

Have a jolly splendid weekend, whatever you plan to do.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait:tiphat:

Pax

My whole point is that culture as a whole even among most Catholics and Christians no longer have these associations with tattoos… you are holding onto a culture that has long since faded away. There are very few people that feel the way you do and those who do are generally those who are quite a bit older. Like my Grandparents generation… Not saying anything against older people. Just some get stuck in the past and I think you may be either one of these people, or someone younger who is trying to hang on to a “more innocent” time. The fact is culture has changed, whether you like it or not. The Church does not condemn tattoos, and for some reason you see yourself as the moral standard for the areas that they do not discuss or condemn. You are just trying to fit scripture, morality and the church into what you already believe. You made up your mind before and even though the Church does not condemn it, you still will no matter if your arguments are totally debunked.

 

[JoyfulLife]

My SD informed me that for me, it would be vanity to wear make-up, aside from concealer for acne/undereye circles. It is okay for a spouse or courting or for a professional job, but other than that, it crosses into vanity.

Piercings aside from just a simple one per lobe ear piercing is multilation. Tattoos are like mutilation, too.

Some have said of make up that if it makes you feel good about yourself, it’s okay… but my SD said that we shouldn’t be so worldly, relying on the external to make up happy; it should be internal and spiritual.

Someone also said its part of “glorifying the body” but my SD said that refers to chastity, not makeup and adorning the body like so.

 

[EasterJoy]

My SD informed me that for me, it would be vanity to wear make-up, aside from concealer for acne/undereye circles. It is okay for a spouse or courting or for a professional job, but other than that, it crosses into vanity.

Piercings aside from just a simple one per lobe ear piercing is multilation. Tattoos are like mutilation, too.

Some have said of make up that if it makes you feel good about yourself, it’s okay… but my SD said that we shouldn’t be so worldly, relying on the external to make up happy; it should be internal and spiritual.

Someone also said its part of “glorifying the body” but my SD said that refers to chastity, not makeup and adorning the body like so.

Your spiritual director knows you and where you are. The way he guides you might rightly be different than what the same priest might say in a homily as being applicable to all Catholic women.

For instance, Mother Theresa, who wore saris that go for 8 rupees, was approached by a woman who wore 800 rupee saris. Mother Theresa told the woman it was not necessary for her to wear 8 rupee saris; she said dropping back to 80 rupee saris would be sufficient.

Now, she would not have told one of her sisters to get herself 80 rupee saris. That sister, a professional religious, is in a different place than the other woman. Likewise, your spiritual director’s task is to help you find the level of spiritual practice that is best for your strenghth, your understanding, and your advancement. I doubt that he wants you going around and concerning yourself about whether make-up should be sold in stores or trying to get it banned at the local Catholic high school or telling your friends that they should imitate you in this or other ways. That does not mean he is wrong for saying that it is not appropriate for you.

Paul addressed this balancing act many times, opposing those on one hand who forbade what was not forbidden and cautioning others on the other hand to be willing to do without anything when required for the sake of the Gospel:

Let no one, then, pass judgment on you in matters of food and drink or with regard to a festival or new moon or sabbath. These are shadows of things to come; the reality belongs to Christ. Let no one disqualify you, delighting in self-abasement and worship of angels, taking his stand on visions, inflated without reason by his fleshly mind, and not holding closely to the head, from whom the whole body, supported and held together by its ligaments and bonds, achieves the growth that comes from God. If you died with Christ to the elemental powers of the world, why do you submit to regulations as if you were still living in the world? “Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!” These are all things destined to perish with use; they accord with human precepts and teachings. While they have a semblance of wisdom in rigor of devotion and self-abasement (and) severity to the body, they are of no value against gratification of the flesh. Col. 2:16-23

But make sure that this liberty of yours in no way becomes a stumbling block to the weak. If someone sees you, with your knowledge, reclining at table in the temple of an idol, may not his conscience too, weak as it is, be “built up” to eat the meat sacrificed to idols? Thus through your knowledge, the weak person is brought to destruction, the brother for whom Christ died. When you sin in this way against your brothers and wound their consciences, weak as they are, you are sinning against Christ. Therefore, if food causes my brother to sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I may not cause my brother to sin. 1 Cor. 8:9-13

 

[Della]

My SD informed me that for me, it would be vanity to wear make-up, aside from concealer for acne/undereye circles. It is okay for a spouse or courting or for a professional job, but other than that, it crosses into vanity.

Piercings aside from just a simple one per lobe ear piercing is multilation. Tattoos are like mutilation, too.

Some have said of make up that if it makes you feel good about yourself, it’s okay… but my SD said that we shouldn’t be so worldly, relying on the external to make up happy; it should be internal and spiritual.

Someone also said its part of “glorifying the body” but my SD said that refers to chastity, not makeup and adorning the body like so.

By all means go by your SD’s direction, but for him to say that certain types of make up are not acceptable is going too far. For instance, mascara and blush and other types of make up are applied to bring out the best features of a woman’s face, so she looks her best. Ask any competent make up artist and s/he’ll say that’s what make up is for. Sure, women have fun with make up, especially for some special event, like a dance or wedding, etc. but it’s innocent enough if it doesn’t become an obsession. Good make up application is an art, just like knowing what clothing is right for each person’s body type. Lay women are free to learn about these things and decide for themselves what is right for them. The Church has no list of prohibited make up or clothing.

 

[PennyinCanada]

By all means go by your SD’s direction, but for him to say that certain types of make up are not acceptable is going too far. For instance, mascara and blush and other types of make up are applied to bring out the best features of a woman’s face, so she looks her best. Ask any competent make up artist and s/he’ll say that’s what make up is for. Sure, women have fun with make up, especially for some special event, like a dance or wedding, etc. but it’s innocent enough if it doesn’t become an obsession. Good make up application is an art, just like knowing what clothing is right for each person’s body type. Lay women are free to learn about these things and decide for themselves what is right for them. The Church has no list of prohibited make up or clothing.

This is my opinion and not written in stone, or in any church documents as far as I know. The arguments above are self centered and not other centered or God centered. The world focuses much on how to make ourselves look our best but God wishes us to look to the needs of others. For myself, I know that I’m sure careful about what I need and not so quick to notice the needs of others. Please feel free to find “what is right for you” but I’m trying to get over spending too much time finding what’s right for me. If God decides to have me spend time in purgatory equal to the amount of time I spent in front of a mirror, I would shake in my boots!

I’m not sure which Saint it was, a man, who when presented with a sketch of himself and asked if he thought the artist captured his likeness well, he replied, I wouldn’t know. He didn’t have a mirror and hadn’t seen himself for decades. Now I’m not going to repeat his virtue of other centered, but it made me think about such matters and how much I’m not like that. I’m sure many would comment, “To be admired but not imitated.” Most would mock such a thing because it’s so contrary to worldly values.

 

[Della]

This is my opinion and not written in stone, or in any church documents as far as I know. The arguments above are self centered and not other centered or God centered. The world focuses much on how to make ourselves look our best but God wishes us to look to the needs of others. For myself, I know that I’m sure careful about what I need and not so quick to notice the needs of others. Please feel free to find “what is right for you” but I’m trying to get over spending too much time finding what’s right for me. If God decides to have me spend time in purgatory equal to the amount of time I spent in front of a mirror, I would shake in my boots!

I’m not sure which Saint it was, a man, who when presented with a sketch of himself and asked if he thought the artist captured his likeness well, he replied, I wouldn’t know. He didn’t have a mirror and hadn’t seen himself for decades. Now I’m not going to repeat his virtue of other centered, but it made me think about such matters and how much I’m not like that. I’m sure many would comment, “To be admired but not imitated.” Most would mock such a thing because it’s so contrary to worldly values.

Frankly, I don’t have any interest in what you or others do about this issue, either. It’s no skin off my nose, as they say. And I hardly worry about the amount of time I spend looking in a mirror putting on make up. It only takes me about 5 minutes tops to look good enough for going out shopping, etc. If God is going to penalize me for spending 5 minutes once or twice a week to put on make up he’s not the God I know and love–he’s a tyrant who only cares about appearances instead of what’s in my heart.

I see a very great danger of spiritual pride here. I’m not saying you’re guilty of that, but when we make too much of some minor thing like this we can all too easily fall into that trap. Better to wear a little make up and realize we’re no better or worse than most other people than to think oneself above everyone else, I say.

For JoyfulLife, it occured to me that the advise to only use a bit of concealer was at the very heart of vanity, according to your SD’s definition. Why not let the world see you, dark circles, acne and all, if you want them to see you as you “really” are? I’m not saying this to be snarky or in a snarky tone of voice, I’m saying it reasonably, from one sane person to another. My last paragraph before this one is how I would respond to any SD, especially any male SD who tried to tell me, a woman, how to wear make up or wear clothes. As long as we are modest and not trying to draw undue attention to ourselves (out of true vanity) there is nothing whatsoever wrong with sensibly applying make up or wearing fashionable clothing.

 

[JoyfulLife]

In response to the post about it being vanity to wear some cover-up… I do see a difference between trying to hide some flaws vs. full on wearing make up to draw attention. Whether it be accident scars, acne, dark circles, etc. I usually don’t even care and don’t bother using any cover-up as I feels its a hassle.

The Blessed Virgin is best to immitate. I’m sure Mary dressed very simply, without jewelry and make-up, etc. just like Nuns. All Mary cares about is loving God, and in loving Him, loving self and neighbor.

Penny said it very well about being other-centered than self-centered. It is really the wordly, secular existence that is focussed on looks, lots of money, big cars, big homes, etc. etc. It’s a problem when you look for that to bring happiness in place of God.

 

[Della]

In response to the post about it being vanity to wear some cover-up… I do see a difference between trying to hide some flaws vs. full on wearing make up to draw attention. Whether it be accident scars, acne, dark circles, etc. I usually don’t even care and don’t bother using any cover-up as I feels its a hassle.

The Blessed Virgin is best to immitate. I’m sure Mary dressed very simply, without jewelry and make-up, etc. just like Nuns. All Mary cares about is loving God, and in loving Him, loving self and neighbor.

Penny said it very well about being other-centered than self-centered. It is really the wordly, secular existence that is focussed on looks, lots of money, big cars, big homes, etc. etc. It’s a problem when you look for that to bring happiness in place of God.

If wearing some cover up is fine, so is mascara and blush if properly applied, especially for those women who work in the professional world and are expected to look their best. Each person has to decide what is right for her. As I said the Church has no list of prohibited make up, jewelry or clothing. All it asks is we be modest and modesty is more than what is worn, it’s how we see ourselves in relation to God and others–with love and respect.

Since no one here would want to draw undue attention to herself or do things just to please others, there’s no problem at all. I’m sure Mary dressed and acted like any other Jewish woman of her day, wearing her dowry head piece with its gold coins, for example. No doubt she wore black when Joseph died like any other widow. She wasn’t afraid to speak up, though. She was no mouse who never said or did anything. She lived life fully, trusting in God every step of the way. I’m sure us doing the same is more important to her than whether or not we wear blush.

 

[catholicmamajoy]

If wearing some cover up is fine, so is mascara and blush if properly applied, especially for those women who work in the professional world and are expected to look their best. Each person has to decide what is right for her. As I said the Church has no list of prohibited make up, jewelry or clothing. All it asks is we be modest and modesty is more than what is worn, it’s how we see ourselves in relation to God and others–with love and respect.

Since no one here would want to draw undue attention to herself or do things just to please others, there’s no problem at all. I’m sure Mary dressed and acted like any other Jewish woman of her day, wearing her dowry head piece with its gold coins, for example. No doubt she wore black when Joseph died like any other widow. She wasn’t afraid to speak up, though. She was no mouse who never said or did anything. She lived life fully, trusting in God every step of the way. I’m sure us doing the same is more important to her than whether or not we wear blush.

For another post about the Blessed Virgin and modesty, please see what CAF’s own Brother Joseph, OFM has to say:forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=7861846&highlight=miriam+of+nazareth#post7861846

Brother’s entire post (#19) is wonderful, but parts 2 and 3 deal specifically with Mary and her attire and behavior.

 

[Dan_Daly]

Just thought I’d respond to all those who have said something along the lines of “moderation is the key”.

Well, a moderate amount of sin can lead you to Hell and seperate you forever from God. If you read about the lives of the saints, you will find few who were champions of moderation. They were champions of Christ. When we look at our attire or our language or any other of a mulitude of things in our life, we shouldn’t see a moderate position. We should seek the right position and then pray for the grace to pursue it and stand by it no matter what.

The forces of evil are constantly pulling all of us to “moderate” our love for Christ.

What is a moderate love for Christ like? I’m reminded of what Justice Antonin Scalia said of moderate interpretation of the Constitution "“What is a moderate interpretation of [the Constitution]? Halfway between what it says and …] what you want it to say?”

Pax.

 

[Della]

Just thought I’d respond to all those who have said something along the lines of “moderation is the key”.

Well, a moderate amount of sin can lead you to Hell and seperate you forever from God. If you read about the lives of the saints, you will find few who were champions of moderation. They were champions of Christ. When we look at our attire or our language or any other of a mulitude of things in our life, we shouldn’t see a moderate position. We should seek the right position and then pray for the grace to pursue it and stand by it no matter what.

The forces of evil are constantly pulling all of us to “moderate” our love for Christ.

What is a moderate love for Christ like? I’m reminded of what Justice Antonin Scalia said of moderate interpretation of the Constitution "“What is a moderate interpretation of [the Constitution]? Halfway between what it says and …] what you want it to say?”

Pax.

What those who used the term moderation are referring to is good prudential judgment. There is no sin in wearing make up or jewelry. The Church has never said so. To go beyond what the Church teaches is to enslave ourselves to our own appetites and opinions instead of living in the freedom of Christ. Most people don’t notice that I am wearing make up or even jewelry–they only see me. Why? Because I wear them properly, according to my age, the occasion, and my state in life–that’s what I mean by moderation, which is perfectly fine for women in our culture.