Proper Dress and Behavior for Catholic Men

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Its not about sloppiness. I wear jeans, polo shirt and running shoes to church. I have got slacks and dress shirts but i know that i dont go to church to impress anyone. It is the attitude of my heart towards God, Worship and studying His word that counts. Not what I wear.

Again, would you wear such things to a job interview? A formal dinner?

Do you not wish to show God equal or even greater respect?

PS: Everyone seems to be lining up on either side: if you want to dress well it must mean you wear Armani suits and are therefore out to ‘impress’ others, and not show respect to God and His Church.

The labels in your clothes do not matter. You can wear stuff from Wal-Mart and still look decent. And no one here is judging the poor, but many people seem to be judging those who call for a sign of respect from anyone who can afford it.

 

[ppasa316]

Are you saying that if this site were Islamic, the Taliban would find some comfort here???

you said it not me lol

 

[ppasa316]

Again, would you wear such things to a job interview? A formal dinner?

Do you not wish to show God equal or even greater respect?

PS: Everyone seems to be lining up on either side: if you want to dress well it must mean you wear Armani suits and are therefore out to ‘impress’ others, and not show respect to God and His Church.

The labels in your clothes do not matter. You can wear stuff from Wal-Mart and still look decent. And no one here is judging the poor, but many people seem to be judging those who call for a sign of respect from anyone who can afford it.

Now you are being legalistic. You show more worship to God by your heart not by what you wear. This shouldn’t even be a debate on clothing to be honest.

 

[EvelynEVF]

Now you are being legalistic. You show more worship to God by your heart not by what you wear. This shouldn’t even be a debate on clothing to be honest.

Our business is to deal with ourselves before God, not to impose our personal standards on anybody else. Beyond simple modesty,I mean, but even there we can’t have bouncers at the door.

To the gentleman who asked about standards of modesty, I think most ladies would appreciate it if men were covered from neck to knee, in something opaque, not torn, and not printed with anything at all, except maybe one of those little corporate monograms on the pocket. It would be nice if we didn’t have to look at grotty feet Personally, I’m a big fan of shirts with collars and pants or shorts that can hold a crease, like chinos or nice jeans, and some kind of clean shoe that isn’t a flipflop.

 

[ppasa316]

Our business is to deal with ourselves before God, not to impose our personal standards on anybody else. Beyond simple modesty,I mean, but even there we can’t have bouncers at the door.

To the gentleman who asked about standards of modesty, I think most ladies would appreciate it if men were covered from neck to knee, in something opaque, not torn, and not printed with anything at all, except maybe one of those little corporate monograms on the pocket. It would be nice if we didn’t have to look at grotty feet Personally, I’m a big fan of shirts with collars and pants or shorts that can hold a crease, like chinos or nice jeans, and some kind of clean shoe that isn’t a flipflop.

1 Samuel 16:7 “For the LORD does not see as man sees;[a] for man looks at the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart.”

 

[EvelynEVF]

1 Samuel 16:7 “For the LORD does not see as man sees;[a] for man looks at the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart.”

Exactly, which is why I phrased it as my preference, in response to a post specifically asking for guidance.

 

[mhazell]

Just an observation, but I find it interesting that in these posts about attire, it seems the women get critisized for “immodest” dressing and men get criticized for sloppy dressing. Good to know sexism is alive and well in the RC!!!

I don’t see what’s particularly sexist about that. When did it become sexist to suggest there might be a minimum standard of dress for Mass?

And both sexes are getting equally criticised, after all–yes, for slightly different things, but men and women are slightly different, wouldn’t you say?

 

[Cracker_Mom]

Just an observation, but I find it interesting that in these posts about attire, it seems the women get critisized for “immodest” dressing and men get criticized for sloppy dressing. Good to know sexism is alive and well in the RC!!!

I agree “sexism” is alive & well in these forums (weirdness, too), but as a woman I can’t really think of an occasion where I’ve seen a man dressed immodestly at church.Speedos at the beach, yes, but skimpy attire at Mass, no.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Now you are being legalistic. You show more worship to God by your heart not by what you wear. This shouldn’t even be a debate on clothing to be honest.

According to whom?

Every time a set of standards in dress gets mentioned in any thread, without exception, people jump on those who suggest we show respect to God AND man by the way we dress.

NO ONE is judging the poor, who (at least on our parish) would never be caught dead attending church in the sloppy attire adopted by many of those who can easily afford better.

As without, so within.

 

[Shin]

I agree “sexism” is alive & well in these forums (weirdness, too), but as a woman I can’t really think of an occasion where I’ve seen a man dressed immodestly at church.Speedos at the beach, yes, but skimpy attire at Mass, no.

Well thankfully I can say I have never seen speedos or tank tops on the guys in church. At least not in person. My eyes glaze over at some of the ‘Novus Ordo’ mass offenses the more vigiliant traditionalist sites post, I don’t look too closely to spare my stomach.

 

[Agripa]

I agree “sexism” is alive & well in these forums (weirdness, too), but as a woman I can’t really think of an occasion where I’ve seen a man dressed immodestly at church.Speedos at the beach, yes, but skimpy attire at Mass, no.

Yours is an intersting observation - perhaps touching on some cultural behavior or even a deeper biological force - dictating how women seek to appear versus men in a group setting. . . its may be true you commonly won’t see men wearing clothes designed to display their “best features”, and yet, we have whole industries designing feminine clothing that display the feminine biological features! Is it the much criticized “objectification” of women or merely the primordial forces of nature at work??

 

[mozier]

I have to admit that I have, in the past, been guilty of less-than-appropriate/sloppy clothing when attending mass. In the last few years, though, I have experiencing a renaissance of my Catholic faith and love for God (by way of the Anglican Use and the Tridentine Latin Mass, as well my parish’s Novus Ordo), so I really want to be the best for Him, both inside and out.

These days, I keep two letters in mind: GQ. I always make it a point to dress my best for my office, so should I not be even more so in my attendance at church to worship God? Of course! All men don’t have to wear suits, but they should wear their best. For me, that is GQ. So I dress in my best, which for me are suits, ties, polished shoes, and well groomed (with just a slight shot of Hugo Boss cologne, not too much!). I just make sure that my inner self, my soul, is just as GQ as my outer clothing.

So yes, I will gladly stand with and worship with the man who has come well-groomed and clean with his best jeans and cleanest t-shirt (pending no obscene messages on it). For him, that may be his GQ. And yes also, liberals, if a homeless man who stinks to high-heaven comes in and sits with me, I will gladly worship with him, as well. He may not be GQ, but we can get him there!

 

[Cracker_Mom]

Yours is an intersting observation - perhaps touching on some cultural behavior or even a deeper biological force - dictating how women seek to appear versus men in a group setting. . . its may be true you commonly won’t see men wearing clothes designed to display their “best features”, and yet, we have whole industries designing feminine clothing that display the feminine biological features! Is it the much criticized “objectification” of women or merely the primordial forces of nature at work??

I think men & women are biologically different & respond to each other differently.Biology & nature have a lot to do with it.I think culture is secondary.
I’m quite conservative,modest, & old fashioned in many ways but distrust some of the posts I see in the T.C. threads from men who lurk behind comments accusing women of causing them to "lust’ by immodest dress.My suspicion is the whole subject is kind of an unhealthy turn-on for these gentlemen.
I suppose men could dress immodestly, but in these days it might be more intended for other men.

 

[Agripa]

I think men & women are biologically different & respond to each other differently.Biology & nature have a lot to do with it.I think culture is secondary.
I’m quite conservative,modest, & old fashioned in many ways but distrust some of the posts I see in the T.C. threads from men who lurk behind comments accusing women of causing them to "lust’ by immodest dress.My suspicion is the whole subject is kind of an unhealthy turn-on for these gentlemen.
I suppose men could dress immodestly, but in these days it might be more intended for other men.

Whew!!! I dread even going in the direction of that hornet’s nest!! But, from the male perspective, I can certainly say that a fine female figure in the pews is, at least to me, an affirmation of God’s creative power at work!!

 

[Sunflower15]

I am not too much for anyone having to “dress up” to go to Church, unless they so desire. Not as a condition, though.

I DO agree though…sometimes I wonder how men are able to pray or focus on the Liturgy, with some women dressed so improperly.

I don’t think I’m prudish…but why do they dress so improperly? I just don’t get their point!

And, my “pet peeve”…girls…sometimes they just don’t seem to have parents! I just wished we could as a society, and as a parish, keep our girls safe and worthy of respect…for their true value as whole persons…not just their physical beauty.

I have 3 sons…and God is wise in not giving me girls! I just think they are so valuable…they should not be “on display” for everyone…

Now, I don’t mean extremes either. Please, what I mean is sometimes the skirts are SO short, you wonder how they can move… forget about men / boys being able to focus on the Liturgy…they probably can’t either for fear of a “wrong move”.

Maybe it’s just me…

 

[Agripa]

I am not too much for anyone having to “dress up” to go to Church, unless they so desire. Not as a condition, though.

I DO agree though…sometimes I wonder how men are able to pray or focus on the Liturgy, with some women dressed so improperly.

I don’t think I’m prudish…but why do they dress so improperly? I just don’t get their point!

And, my “pet peeve”…girls…sometimes they just don’t seem to have parents! I just wished we could as a society, and as a parish, keep our girls safe and worthy of respect…for their true value as whole persons…not just their physical beauty.

I have 3 sons…and God is wise in not giving me girls! I just think they are so valuable…they should not be “on display” for everyone…

Now, I don’t mean extremes either. Please, what I mean is sometimes the skirts are SO short, you wonder how they can move… forget about men / boys being able to focus on the Liturgy…they probably can’t either for fear of a “wrong move”.

Maybe it’s just me…

Well, certainly most parents never want to percieve their kid as being anyone’s object of attraction or have a child growing into maturity unnecessarily display that fact!

But on the other hand, the whole cultural apparatus of marriage is the controled and regulated joining of male and female in order to reproduce in a stable environment. Try as we might, the “civilizing” force of religion or cultural norms cannot nor should not stamp out the biological impulses to display and percieve physical attractions! (Parents might diminish chances for grandkids, otherwise…)

 

[Sunflower15]

Well, certainly most parents never want to percieve their kid as being anyone’s object of attraction or have a child growing into maturity unnecessarily display that fact!

But on the other hand, the whole cultural apparatus of marriage is the controled and regulated joining of male and female in order to reproduce in a stable environment. Try as we might, the “civilizing” force of religion or cultural norms cannot nor should not stamp out the biological impulses to display and percieve physical attractions! (Parents might diminish chances for grandkids, otherwise…)

I truly don’t mean to exaggerate…but I am talking about children…and pre- teens and young teens…they should not be in the quest to produce grandchildren [at least I sure hope so!].

Again, I mean extremely short skirts/shorts…extremely flimsy tank tops… what should be worn around a pool or while washing a car…sort of thing. Honest, I’m not exaggerating! And, yes, I do think to myself, at least they are coming to Church!

 

[EvelynEVF]

Again, I mean extremely short skirts/shorts…extremely flimsy tank tops… what should be worn around a pool or while washing a car…sort of thing. Honest, I’m not exaggerating! And, yes, I do think to myself, at least they are coming to Church!

This is where I think we need pastors to speak, because no way would these kids be wearing what they wear if they had any clue at all what message they were sending. And of course any personal confrontation is terribly embarrassing and results in defensiveness and everybody upset with everybody else.

 

[Agripa]

I truly don’t mean to exaggerate…but I am talking about children…and pre- teens and young teens…they should not be in the quest to produce grandchildren [at least I sure hope so!].

Again, I mean extremely short skirts/shorts…extremely flimsy tank tops… what should be worn around a pool or while washing a car…sort of thing. Honest, I’m not exaggerating! And, yes, I do think to myself, at least they are coming to Church!

But keep in mind - our modern Western culture includes a very, very prolonged adolescent period - contrast that with the sexual mores and attitudes carried into the early Church 2000 years ago from a Semetic and Roman culture where young females were seen as property to be kept “pure” and “undefiled” until married off to an economically appropriate family, typically at 14 or 15 years of age! Today, we want our kids to have graduated highschool (18 y.o) and either have completed a trade or further schooling (21 - 22 y.o) and be living on their own and self supporting before we want them to even consider marriage (25 - late twenties??) So today we have this very long, extended period of time, normatively encouraged, before mating. But biologically, the human body seeks sexual expression from adolescence! Hence, it seems there will be a continued problem of inappropriate clothing in the pews with such numbers of unnattached young single people!!

 

[Shin]

Young females are still to be kept “pure” and “undefiled”.