Our parish priest refused Communion to women churchgoers who wore pants

[JSSebastianoP]

Since you seem to be such a wellspring of knowledge, please, clues us all in.

Just by doing a simple google search women + pants + crossdressing, you find out immediately that it’s agaisnt Islamic law for one…

Remember, since you said it has never been considered as such, one example would prove you wrong…

The Church does not issue dictates of everything that is “allowed”; it issues prohibitions in circumstances when things are definitively and morally not allowed. By your logic, we may be “left in a bit of a bind,” since the Church has never issued an authoritative statement saying that women may play tennis or men may do needlepoint. Your thinking is much more Puritan than Catholic.

So we are indeed “left in a bit of a bind” on those issues, yes, in that it is up to the individual to decide what to do. I would say women playing tennis is probably okay and men doing needlepoint could be okay depending on the context, but still suspicious…

Pax.

 

[JSSebastianoP]

Some of the “significant minority” believe that women should not attend higher education or even work for a living. So what does that have to do with anything?

Well, that depends on the circumstances. I have a woman relative that was left with 8 kids as a single mother. She needed to get educated and get a job. In other cases, though, it is not necessary. So I say it depends on the situation.

I love “what if?” scenarios. What if everyone in the world started to employ a little common sense and not get their dander up over insignificant, trivial matters?

This is not “insignificant, trivial matters”. IF women wearing pants is crossdressing, then it is grave matter… So since we’re dealing with the potential for grave sin, I’d hardly brush this matter off…

Pax.

 

[Lujack]

This is not “insignificant, trivial matters”. IF women wearing pants is crossdressing, then it is grave matter… So since we’re dealing with the potential for grave sin, I’d hardly brush this matter off…

And if saying “Golly gee gosh” was taking the Lord’s name in vain, that would be grave matter as well, but we have no problem brushing that off.

 

[Newbie2]

yes.

Up until quite recently, women did not wear pants (in the U.S. anyways, I can’t speak for the Philipines). So, where different people draw the line is respective of his thoughts on the matter.

Women have been wearing pants in the US for 30+ years. Where have you been?

So, CHRIST didn’t preach directly on homosexuality either, yet we always pull out Leviticus… We are to respect the old law unless told otherwise. Have you been informed of anything that allows crossdressing?

I don’t recall any specific teaching from the Church that says not to. Paul talks about women wearing head coverings…the Church has not “ruled” on that either. Crossdressing is an entirely different matter.

So we’re to stone adulterers? I don’t recall any specific teaching from the Church that says not to. Don’t be ridiculous.We are under no obligation to follow levitical law. Ever heard of the “new covenant” ? I’m pretty sure Jesus’ preaching teaches us otherwise.

Pax.

No, but I would still ask of you the following; has it issued an authoritative teaching saying it is proper for women to wear pants? Since the Church has not issued such a document, we are left in a bit of a bind aren’t we?

Pax.

She has not issued a document allowing men to wear pants either, has she? How about men wearing ties? Sport jackets? Suits? Dress shoes?

Get the point?

 

[Timothysis]

Just by doing a simple google search women + pants + crossdressing, you find out immediately that it’s agaisnt Islamic law for one…

Remember, since you said it has never been considered as such, one example would prove you wrong…

Thank you for proving me wrong, though I must say that I never considered Islamic law when pointing out the teachings of the Catholic Church. I wonder how many times Islamic scholars point to Canon law when debating particular issues? Nevertheless, if crossdressing is used in sexually illicit ways, then the sexual act is immoral, not the pants, shoes, or shirt involved. If one used a banana in a immoral way, that doesn’t make all bananas immoral, does it? The question is, however, if it is immoral or immodest for women, in general, to wear pants and you have still failed to answer the question without resort to wild tangents and confused logic.

I would say women playing tennis is probably okay and men doing needlepoint could be okay depending on the context, but still suspicious…

So, from a Catholic viewpoint, can you show why women playing tennis or men doing needlepoint could NOT be ok, especially since you regard these activities as “suspicious,” and please limit your response to Catholic teaching and theology, not Islam , buddism or any other straw man you can come up with.