Proper attire for Mass

[Tantum_ergo]

Do you truly recommend pulling people aside and telling them they are dressed inappropriately and you think that is going to not leave them feeling injured. And don’t pull out some “some times you have to do things that make you feel uncomfortable”. We are talking about somebody wearing spaghetti straps to communion, not having an abortion or marrying somebody of the same sex. They are there to worship. It builds up God’s glory.

If you take away from that, you are tearing down God’s glory. It’s that simple.

The clothes you wear do nothing to tear down God’s glory. God does not see our clothes. He sees our souls. He does not give you brownie points because you dress up. And he would graft you out as easily as the Hebrews should you think you are somehow more necessary, more worthy, or more holy than any of the lowliest sinners that come to Him.

I’m not judging anybody, I’m speaking up for those who may not have a voice and letting you in on a little secret - they matter.

---

Veronica, to me your entire post was a mishmash of your misunderstanding everything I said, your building up ‘ad hominem’ arguments attacking me and my ‘intentions’ which somehow, despite everything I said to the contrary, you insist on taking as my’ attacking’ people, and your insistence that my concern for education for all was my effort to get ‘brownie points’ and your own little ‘lecture’ that by doing so I was proving myself ‘unworthy’.

And your last? How. . .astonishing. . .that after what I wrote you still seem to judge me (and have no problem in doing so, apparently, though I cannot ‘judge anybody’ myself according to you) as thinking any given person ‘doesn’t matter.’

Well, I quite honestly have no idea whatsoever how you read my posts and got the totally mistaken ideas about me that you did. However you did it, apparently no words of mine can undo that impression.

While you speak up for those you say I have ‘contempt for’ (and I most certainly do not) . .in your doing so you pour your own worse ‘contempt’ for me onto me. But I guess you don’t see that. You are so concerned with what you think I said or meant, which you are so certain is ‘wrong’ and which you are gung-ho to correct me on. . .you ‘say’ it is to ‘be a voice for others’ but that ‘voice’ you use is full of anger and disdain . . .even though I am a ‘child of God’ too, Veronica.

The thing that I find saddest is that in having to **point out to you **where you made a mistake in ‘interpreting’ my words, you use the fact that I had to tell you that you made an **error **(and, since I wrote the words knowing what I meant, then if you say I meant something else I am sorry but there is just no other way to say it but that you did err) to heap even more accusations against me. Thus, you put me into a ‘lose-lose’ situation.

Say nothing, and you can gloat "It’s true–look, she doesn’t tell me I’m wrong.’

Respond, and you have yet more ‘ammunition’ of how evil and sinful I am to all the ‘poor people’ whom you have constituted yourself the ‘champion’ of, lest I turn them away from God forever, vicious evil woman that you say I am. . .

Well, I think I have made my point clear in the previous posts. So from now on, if you still want to (or, let’s be fair, if you honestly and truly are misreading my posts with no malice aforethought, as is certainly possible) go ahead and insist that no matter what I plainly said, it is obvious to you that I really meant something completely opposite and of course very sinful and hurtful too. . .go ahead.

I don’t mind having to explain once or twice even, to people, because let’s face it, nobody is perfect (me least of all) and sometimes people can honestly and truly make mistakes. Usually, after one or two ‘exchanges’, the people involved can usually take the ‘good faith’ of the other person and make whatever apology or ‘understanding noises’ necessary and move on.

I had hoped this would happen. It still might. Let us pray.

 

[Charbeau]

I’m timidly stepping into this discussion because as a very new attendee of Mass this is one thing that I have actually been really surprised by. I have had a Catholic friend explain to me that the justification for the Pope and other members of the Catholic hierarchy wearing such elaborate robes is because they are dressing their “best” to be in the presence of God at Mass. So, it is all the same Mass, right? Regardless of who is performing or receiving it? So why the justification for the very elaborate dress and then the justification for the extremely casual dress?

I have attended Mass at two different parishes in my area and at both I have seen teen girls in shorts so short that I wouldn’t have been allowed to wear them at the beach when I was a teenager much less to church. And in a congregation of hundreds I am generally one of the only women in a dress.

I totally understand the difficulty in maternity/nursing wear for women. I have been pregnant twice and am currently nursing my infant and it does get complicated to find dresses that can accommodate breastfeeding discreetly. Skirts and tops work really well.

My opinion on modest dress at church probably stems from my evangelical background. There is no way I would have been allowed by my parents to attend church in pants and no other women in our congregation wore them either aside from one disabled woman who used a wheelchair.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Thanks for giving us a good ‘view’ from somebody coming into this ‘arena’ without a lot of preconceived notions or years worth of conditioning for the rationale of dressing in ‘le casual’ style, Charbeau!

Off again–crochet time. . .it’s fun but so new (30 plus years of knitting but I had never tried crochet!) and then back to pack, pack, packing. . .

Not a dull week for me!

God bless.

 

[Veronica7978]

Dear Veronica - ever since Adam and Eve sewed together fig leaves, folks have known what their sexuality does to the opposite sex. The “power” some gain by dressing provocatively is sometimes hard to give up if it is their only weapon.

Knowing whether or not one is dressed properly for anyplace, be it Mass, the shopping mall or the workplace, is pretty simple.

I don’t know why you are so defensive of what common sense tells folks is wrong, other than perhaps you need to defend yourself? I’ve heard many arguements in favor of God not caring what we wear, but if that were true, He never would’ve specified garments for His priests under the Old Testament. How we prepare to meet someone says a lot about how we feel about that person. And when that person is none other than God, shouldn’t we take a little extra care? Why do you take issue with those of us who do?

Peace,

Gail

P.S. You’d be surprised - when I was growing up, I wasn’t allowed near the Catholic Church by my parents. Once I did get the opportunity to go to a Mass on the sly and the Ushers were actually showing people the door who weren’t dressed right. It was at Queen of the Universe Parish in Levittown. I witnessed this bit of chivalry with my own eyes and was glad I was wearing a dress! I don’t think some folks would tolerate being corrected like that these days, but it is necessary.

Your response serves to prove my point that you, and the people going out of their way to criticize and judge others during mass, believe everybody has had the same life lessons they have had.

Not everybody has grown up on wonder bread and mom’s cookies. The people who have not, need the embrace of the church even more so.

God specified garments in the Old Testament - true. He also said for people to not eat certain foods and worship on Saturday. Do you do abide those as well?

As a Christian, it is easy for me to understand that Christ turns his back on no man. He didn’t say “let the appropriately dressed children come to me”. He said “let them come to me”. He didn’t turn his back on Nicademas (sp) hanging from a tree to see him. So why do you think He would stop any person who loves Him from coming to Him today.

 

[Veronica7978]

I’m going to try to clear up my responses to you here, excactly what I saw and what I was thinking so that you will understand why I posted what I posted to you.

Well, Veronica, what has happened in the last 40 years or so is a ‘sea change’ that affects not only what people wear ‘at Mass’ but the entire attitude of society about not only ‘dress’ but every other societal ‘standard’ as well.

*Example 1: you lump in what people wear to the entire attitude change in society, which may or may not correlate, yet appear to function negatively in this context. *

People are not concerned with putting ‘their personal standard’ onto everybody else. . .people are (and quite rightly) cognizant that the whole relativistic idea that ‘standards’ and ‘appropriate dress’ should not be 'put forth for ‘the people’ as each person is ‘different’ and therefore what “I” find appropriate is not what “John” or “Mary” find appropriate. . . is itself a ‘new’ idea that was a byproduct of the 1960s ‘deconstructionism’ and 'equality means not striving to be the best an individual can be, but dumbing down, dressing down, and acting down to the lowest possible level, lest the ‘lowest’ feel ‘ashamed’ and the higher ‘guilty’."

In a culture which has lived with 40 years of this reversal, the mere idea that appropriate dress not only exists as an absolute, but indeed it–and indeed a type of ‘absolute’ standard–has existed for millennia, seems to be the ‘newfangled’ or ‘wrong’ notion.

**It isn’t. **

Again, what is appropriate dress? Is it the same for you as it is for somebody who has been raised by drug addicted parents with little social training? Is it the same for you as it is for a child who was raised in foster care with few material possessions? How about an inner city child who grew up thinking that basketball shorts are ok because they are expensive? Or an old woman who still wears the scarf on her head?

The twisting around though is a tactic used by the relativist-minded persons to help maintain the current status quo. Rather than having people stop to think, "Wait a minute. If I actually bother to read history, Not everybody reads…I know this because I teach reading at the middle school level as well as have volunteered to teach adult literacy, so your assumption that people are learned is again, assuming everybody comes from your same background. I can see that all cultures had ritual and specific standards and attitudes and attire and this was human and good --and then suddenly, in a period of ‘upheaval’, all this was ‘changed’ by a vocal element of society – then maybe I should start wondering why it was changed. Maybe I should look at ‘the fruits’ of society and see if this dressing down and dumbing down has had positive effects or not. Maybe I should start to ask why, if ‘casual’ dressing and ‘not thinking about one’s appearance’ are supposed to be so good and healthy. . .why are the casual dressers so all fired concerned about people wanting to dress up? They aren’t…they appear to not know they are dressed down in most cases.

You see, if ‘we aren’t supposed to consider our appearance or the appearance of others’. . .then the ‘casual’ dressers shouldn’t even be responding to those who urge 'more respectful dressing, for two reasons: I would imagine the only response they would have would be embarrassment, hurt, anger - because they most likely don’t know they are there being judged. Would you continue to go if you knew you were being judged?

1. IF we aren’t supposed to ‘pay attention to what we wear’ then the ‘casual dresser’ shouldn’t be paying attention to the ‘dressier dresser’ or getting concerned about what the dressier dresser wears, should he? They aren’t in most cases, except possibly to admire the nice clothes. They probably think the “nice dressers” are nice people.
2. If the ‘casual’ dressing is really so great, then no amount of ‘modeling’ of ‘dressier dress’ will work in getting the majority of the people to ‘change’. If the casual dresser is so sure he is right, all he needs do is sit back as he has done for the last 40 years. The casual dresser will not learn except through modeling. As well, the casual dressers will in fact continue for 40 more years because they will be continually joining the church as a new members and will not be offended by the “nice dresser” who is judgmental causing him to feel sorrow or ashamed.

It appears that the casual dresser is not really concerned about being ‘forced’ into something (judging by all the posters who post variants of "it won’t happen and if it does I won’t be coming to church), but rather, is more worried about people actually ‘choosing’ the dressier dress freely, now that more people are actually talking about it, and choosing to ‘dress’ that way. Because then the casual dresser is in a pickle. It is one thing to play the martyr role of “you people are just trying to humiliate the poor or paying more attention to what people wear, No, I feel that you are just trying to make yourselves somehow more worthy, perhaps you feel some kind of need for this. how unChristian.” But what if all the poor, and all the people the casual ones are trying to ‘protect’ start wanting to dress ‘better?’ Again, they have no idea. It’s not, in most cases, a decision, or a want. They don’t know, nor care. They are there to hear the word of God, receive communion and be in communion with you. What then? And that, I think, is what some (not all) of the casual crowd are really worried about. Not ‘the poor’. . .but themselves, and that they might actually have to do something that they don’t want to do. . .‘dress dressier.’

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Those who argue against standards in dress can easily expand that argument against any and all standards.

 

[Veronica7978]

Those who argue against standards in dress can easily expand that argument against any and all standards.

If that is true, one could also say: those who would ban people from mass for dress would expand that to any and all transgressions, thereby trumping God’s commands to forgive sins.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Wow, I wish I could read minds as well as that.

 

[GailMac]

Veronica, Once a person has made a commitment to follow Jesus, that person usually looks at the sins in one’s life and begins making changes. If a woman is dressed improperly, it will be obvious, if she is honest about it. If she’s stubborn and not willing to make changes, she’ll get defensive is her failings are pointed to. She’ll get quite used to looking down her nose at anyone who would dare “judge” her level of modesty. And she’ll smuggly convince herself that Jesus loves her no matter what her sins are, so there!!! and if anyone challeges her to look at her immodest behaviors, she’ll spew venom at the offenders and wrap her immodest shoulders in the same type of self-righteousness she claims those who don’t like immodest dressing and verbalize their distress over it at Mass have. See?

I thank you for being honest about your opinions, but can I ask how do you dress for Mass? Can you claim modesty as one of your virtues? Do you care if some man you don’t even know may be enticed by something you wear? Do you even care? Before you go on a tirade about Jesus not caring about what anyone wears and those who don’t like skimpy attire, **try to think about seeing dressing modestly as a loving thing to do for your neighbor. **

Peace,

Gail

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I still will pray that you will try to address what I actually said, Veronica, and not your erroneous assumptions of what you think I said or meant. So far I hate to say it, but that’s what you have done. I’d be delighted to talk to you about anything that I really said, but I must draw the line at having you constantly tell me that I ‘said this’ or ‘assume this’ or ‘judge this’ etc. when I have done nothing of the kind. It is extremely tiresome to read through a post that basically takes everything I said and misinterprets or misunderstands it, harshly ‘scolding’ me for things I never said, did, or thought.

 

[mammallama]

A hundred years ago it was scandalous to show the ankle.Women went to the beach covered from head to toe.Pregnant women were not to be seen in public

50 years ago a proper woman wore gloves and hat practically every where.Bathing suits actually covered her valuable assets.Women wore dresses at home.

And today Pregnant woman can be seen in public in what can be best described as a bra.Co-eds flock to spring break in Fla hoping to bare all for "girls gone wild’ video crews.High school girls get breast implants.Kids make raunchy videos of themselves for “My Space”

What’s it going to be like 50 years from now?

 

[Veronica7978]

Veronica, Once a person has made a commitment to follow Jesus, that person usually looks at the sins in one’s life and begins making changes. If a woman is dressed improperly, it will be obvious, if she is honest about it. If she’s stubborn and not willing to make changes, she’ll get defensive is her failings are pointed to. She’ll get quite used to looking down her nose at anyone who would dare “judge” her level of modesty. And she’ll smuggly convince herself that Jesus loves her no matter what her sins are, so there!!! and if anyone challeges her to look at her immodest behaviors, she’ll spew venom at the offenders and wrap her immodest shoulders in the same type of self-righteousness she claims those who don’t like immodest dressing and verbalize their distress over it at Mass have. See?

I thank you for being honest about your opinions, but can I ask how do you dress for Mass? Can you claim modesty as one of your virtues? Do you care if some man you don’t even know may be enticed by something you wear? Do you even care? Before you go on a tirade about Jesus not caring about what anyone wears and those who don’t like skimpy attire, **try to think about seeing dressing modestly as a loving thing to do for your neighbor. **

Peace,

Gail

Ya um, Gail, you’re barking up the wrong tree. I’ve explained it quite clearly - You refuse to read and understand. I am a middle-aged school teacher. I am quite modest (most likely more so than yourself)- at church, at home and in school. If you are truly interested in my personal business that is, you have it now. Though I’m modest, it doesn’t play a part in the way I view others when they are coming to pray.

**My entire point is that they do not stop sinning and suddenly understand certain social norms, that is a childish and immature way to view conversion. **

 

[Veronica7978]

I still will pray that you will try to address what I actually said, Veronica, and not your erroneous assumptions of what you think I said or meant. So far I hate to say it, but that’s what you have done. I’d be delighted to talk to you about anything that I really said, but I must draw the line at having you constantly tell me that I ‘said this’ or ‘assume this’ or ‘judge this’ etc. when I have done nothing of the kind. It is extremely tiresome to read through a post that basically takes everything I said and misinterprets or misunderstands it, harshly ‘scolding’ me for things I never said, did, or thought.

I can do no more than quote what you said and comment within the quotes. Are you kidding me?

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I can do no more than quote what you said and comment within the quotes. Are you kidding me?

Well, since you ask me. . .even with the rhetorical phrase. . .I’ll tell you.
No, I’m not ‘kidding you.’

You 'quote what I said" and then you comment. . .but your comments continue to be misinterpretations of what ‘you think’ my post ‘said’ and not what I actually said at all.

No, I’m not ‘kidding you.’

You can ‘do more’. You can, as I requested, address what I said, and not the strawmen, ad hominems, and ‘judgment calls’ **you **say I say, etc.

Thank you, and good night.

 

[mammallama]

. I am quite modest (most likely more so than yourself)- at church, at home and in school. .

Hasn’t this gone on long enough?

Statements like that are slanderous.There is no need for that here.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

There have been encouraging signs that (without in any way trying to belittle or ‘judge’ those who are currently dressing improperly for Mass) priests and bishops are spearheading efforts to educate people on this and other topics which are important to our human dignity and to our worship of God. The use of guidelines and other helps is spreading and the reactions, far from being those of anger and shame, have been (pardon the pun) almost ‘uniformly’ positive.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

A hundred years ago it was scandalous to show the ankle.Women went to the beach covered from head to toe.Pregnant women were not to be seen in public

50 years ago a proper woman wore gloves and hat practically every where.Bathing suits actually covered her valuable assets.Women wore dresses at home.

And today Pregnant woman can be seen in public in what can be best described as a bra.Co-eds flock to spring break in Fla hoping to bare all for "girls gone wild’ video crews.High school girls get breast implants.Kids make raunchy videos of themselves for “My Space”

What’s it going to be like 50 years from now?

In the opposite direction, I hope!

Maybe 50 years from now, a devout nation will look back and liken these times to the Roman orgies: “What were they THINKING?”