Modesty question-ladies only please

[fpt]

Standards of Modesty in Dress
Imprimatur dated Sept. 24, 1956
“A dress cannot be called decent which is cut deeper than two fingers breadth under the pit of the throat; which does not cover the arms at least to the elbows; and scarcely reaches a bit beyond the knees. Furthermore, dresses of transparent materials are improper.”
The Cardinal Vicar of Pius XII
p.s. About that quote - in the book it is noted that "short sleeves were also permitted as a temporary concession, with ecclesiastical approval, because of “impossible market conditions.”

Sorry, but this statement, even if it is writing by the cardinal with the imprimatur of the Vatican, is not per se a rule, a law, thus an obligation and even a duty.

What is the level and the value of this sentence in the hierachy of norms of catholic church? That is the great issue?

In addition, this type of manner to discern is so simple, too much uptight and for me it is an insult of the human intelligence. May be I am liberal, but I do not think so because catholic religion is not a list of what is okay or not okay, per se, like in the Old Testament.

The issue of " centimeters " is very weird, not reasonnable.

the puritanism, the culturalism, the jansenism, the victorianism, the absurdism, the rigorism, the moralism are very wrong.

In conclusion, it is impossible to take this statement like a truly point of view from God. Sorry, if I can appear to be against the point of view of a cardinal, but per se, it is not a problem and it is not a sin.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

Wow, thanks for the replies everyone! I’ve worn this to Mass(with a cardigan/cover up of course). I just wanted to see what y’all thought because this dress can be worn for different occasions outside of Mass, and living in Texas,I find it uncomfortable to wear a cardigan all the time. I know a lady who does very cheap alterations, so I may just take it to her and have her make the straps. I just wasn’t sure if the halter look was too tempting or not. I’ll play it safe and just put straps on, and wear my cardigan for Mass. Thanks for the (name removed by moderator)ut ladies! Modest is hottest! lol
PS
The dress I got is actually the black polka dot one! So it’s not see through. I’m also pretty short so thankfully the front part falls to my knee And thankfully the back part is very long on me. Thanks again ladies!

That was my favorite of the options shown! Polka dots are back in fashion and so fresh! I love them!

 

[gabcarter]

Sorry, but this statement, even if it is writing by the cardinal with the imprimatur of the Vatican, is not per se a rule, a law, thus an obligation and even a duty.

What is the level and the value of this sentence in the hierachy of norms of catholic church? That is the great issue?

In addition, this type of manner to discern is so simple, too much uptight and for me it is an insult of the human intelligence. May be I am liberal, but I do not think so because catholic religion is not a list of what is okay or not okay, per se, like in the Old Testament.

The issue of " centimeters " is very weird, not reasonnable.

the puritanism, the culturalism, the jansenism, the victorianism, the absurdism, the rigorism, the moralism are very wrong.

In conclusion, it is impossible to take this statement like a truly point of view from God. Sorry, if I can appear to be against the point of view of a cardinal, but per se, it is not a problem and it is not a sin.

Truth is not relative…it is absolute. You call these guidelines weird, not reasonable, absurd and uptight. You say the Catholic religion is not a list of what is okay or not okay…of course our faith is an individual relationship with God, but it does not mean that we don’t all have to follow certain rules! That is the whole point, following God’s rules out of love and respect for Him. We have the 6 duties of a Catholic, we must accept the Pope’s teachings on the faith, etc. that we all must obey whether you find them rigorous, puritan-like, uptight or weird.

 

[Et_Cetera]

Standards of Modesty in Dress
Imprimatur dated Sept. 24, 1956
“A dress cannot be called decent which is cut deeper than two fingers breadth under the pit of the throat; which does not cover the arms at least to the elbows; and scarcely reaches a bit beyond the knees. Furthermore, dresses of transparent materials are improper.”
The Cardinal Vicar of Pius XII
p.s. About that quote - in the book it is noted that "short sleeves were also permitted as a temporary concession, with ecclesiastical approval, because of “impossible market conditions.”

Times have changed in regard to dress. To the elbows? I’m sorry, but those guidelines seem unnecessarily strict. There are dresses that don’t fall within those guidelines that I’m sure a priest wouldn’t even give a second thought to.

 

[fpt]

Truth is not relative…it is absolute. You call these guidelines weird, not reasonable, absurd and uptight. You say the Catholic religion is not a list of what is okay or not okay…of course our faith is an individual relationship with God, but it does not mean that we don’t all have to follow certain rules! That is the whole point, following God’s rules out of love and respect for Him. We have the 6 duties of a Catholic, we must accept the Pope’s teachings on the faith, etc. that we all must obey whether you find them rigorous, puritan-like, uptight or weird.

Sorry, a simple document that is not an official deed in the top of the Hierarchy of norms of catholic church is not, per se, a catholic rule, thus that is simple opinion, even if it is coming from a cardinal. It is not, per se, a moral obligation or a moral directive.

As catholic, we have the right or even the duty to discern the context, the value, the level and the link with the real and true Reason, if we are capable.

This type of speech is very puritanist, rigorist, very general, very culturalist, too much cultural, so simplistic.

Like catholic lay person, I have a right to discern et to evaluate the speechs with the catholic reason and the true human intelligence.

Faith and Reason have to go together; Moral and Reason have to go together;

I am so sorry if my post can be direct, " rude ", but like human being and catholic lay person, I have the moral right to think that and to say that. For thinking in the other way, I am waiting a dogmatic document about the centimeters for dresses, skirts, sleeves, underwears, swimsuits, bikinis, trousers, shirts, hats…etc.

 

[fpt]

Truth is not relative…it is absolute. You call these guidelines weird, not reasonable, absurd and uptight. You say the Catholic religion is not a list of what is okay or not okay…of course our faith is an individual relationship with God, but it does not mean that we don’t all have to follow certain rules! That is the whole point, following God’s rules out of love and respect for Him. We have the 6 duties of a Catholic, we must accept the Pope’s teachings on the faith, etc. that we all must obey whether you find them rigorous, puritan-like, uptight or weird.

I am so sorry, I am a man from France, thus firstly I cannot post this message on this thread because it is only for ladies, and secondly my French culture is to much full of critics.

See you soon on CAF

 

[gabcarter]

The Philippine Hierarchy officially recognized the 1930 Special Instructions of the Sacred Council as prescribing the Roman Standards of Modesty in dress for women and girls all over the world. Acting upon this letter from the Sacred Council, the Philippine Bishops issued a joint pastoral on May 19, 1931, prescribing these Roman Standards for all their Dioceses. And on December 6, 1959, His Eminence Rufino Cardinal Santos, Archbishop of Manila, issued a lengthy and masterful Pastoral Letter to “confirm once more and declare in full vigor in our Archdiocese what the Holy Father and the Catholic Hierarchy have stated on different occasions.” The Cardinal then repeats the “Church’s stand concerning modesty in dress” by quoting the standards set by Pope Pius XI.

Pope Pius XII [says]:
There always exists an absolute norm to be preserved, no matter how broad and changeable the relative morals of styles may be … Style may never give a proximate occasion of sin, and clothing must be a shield against disordered sensuality.

catholictradition.org/Children/immodest-dress.htm

 

[LightBound]

The Philippine Hierarchy officially recognized the 1930 Special Instructions of the Sacred Council as prescribing the Roman Standards of Modesty in dress for women and girls all over the world. Acting upon this letter from the Sacred Council, the Philippine Bishops issued a joint pastoral on May 19, 1931, prescribing these Roman Standards for all their Dioceses. And on December 6, 1959, His Eminence Rufino Cardinal Santos, Archbishop of Manila, issued a lengthy and masterful Pastoral Letter to “confirm once more and declare in full vigor in our Archdiocese what the Holy Father and the Catholic Hierarchy have stated on different occasions.” The Cardinal then repeats the “Church’s stand concerning modesty in dress” by quoting the standards set by Pope Pius XI.

Pope Pius XII [says]:
There always exists an absolute norm to be preserved, no matter how broad and changeable the relative morals of styles may be … Style may never give a proximate occasion of sin, and clothing must be a shield against disordered sensuality.

catholictradition.org/Children/immodest-dress.htm

I realize you are very new here, but it is against forum rules to post links to sedevacantist or sedevacantist-leaning sites.

 

[The_Bucket]

You can quit trolling anytime gabcarter. Anytime…