Proper Dress and Behavior for Catholic Women

[57classic]

You seem to have missed the part where I said…as long as they are not wearing revealing clothes with their skin hanging out all over. How is a woman who wears nice dress pants to Mass a distraction? If it is a distraction to another person…then that would indeed be THEIR problem, doncha think? Don’t misunderstand, I know about those who go to Mass…(the NO comes to mind) wearing short skirts and low cut blouses and boys wearing t-shirts with the skull and crossbones. Now…how does that compare to a woman wearing nice fitting, clean dress pants? IMO…it doesn’t compare in any way at all.

There is a difference in being a “deliberate” distraction…and being a distraction because of the narrow mindset of some.

I did admit that my post was somewhat off topic and instead of quothing both prior posts that promted me to post, I just picked yours and I am sorry for that. I was also referring to BlackDog’s reference to 'sweaty and grimy" and motorcycle gear. While I admire the desire to attend Mass, I do hope a stop at the restroom to wash up is included.
Having clairified that, I want to consider what the reaction would be if the priest appeared without vestments, in his “blacks” or even in street clothes. We all EXPECT the priest to arrange his day, regardless of the calls to hospitals or other crisis, so that he is on time, fully dressed in the proper vestments for the day. That’s his job. What is expected of the laity? Is just showing up enough? Aren’t we always an example to each other whether we want to be or not?

 

[polkadots]

As long as skirts are not officially required, then how can we say what people wear is immoral unless it is revealing etc. ? I’ve often thought that everyone should wear long robes in church. I think that would help a great deal.

I don’t understand the argument that says pants are for men and then at the same time says that women wearing pants is immodest. Presumably making oneself look like a man would make a woman look less attractive. I think pants are not particularly modest for men either if you really want to think about it.

 

[Salonika]

ac claire:

I understand what you’re saying, Salonika. I still think though that you shouldn’t take it personally.

I still find it very difficult to understand how posters can say something like “only sluts wear short skirts” or “women who wear trousers are sinful” and not be making a judgment about those who wear them. It seems to me that the only way to avoid such judgement is to change what I wear or keep away from them.

Saying something like “I do not approve of women wearing trousers” does not have the same jimplication to me. It is someone giving an opinion. It’s not telling someone what to do. It always implies the other person has the right to their own view.
ac claire:

If I believe something is sinful, and whether or not that thing is sinful comes up in a conversation (like in a thread such as this)…then my choices are either to a.) voice my opinion and thus contribute to the conversation or b.) remain silent so I don’t “offend” anyone. I’ve never understood the value of political correctness and this seems to be just another version of it.

I also question the value of engaging in conversations where my views are not going to be listened to or where I am told that if I understood the situation correctly I would change my mind. But sometimes it’s the choice of being true to your views or denying them, then you have to speak up.
ac claire:

Now personally, about the topic at hand, I don’t believe that women wearing pants is sinful. And a nice pair of pants on a woman is of course going to be more modest than a tight micro-mini skirt and haltar top, stiletto heels, streetwalker make-up, etc., etc. However, I do believe that in general women should dress like women, not like men. Pants were designed to be clothes for men. Up until this year I wore pants almost exclusively. Then I met my fiance and since he appreciates femininity so much, I started wearing skirts to please him. In the process I started reading about modesty and slowly came around to the views I’ve expressed in this thread. Still, I own more pants than skirts. They’re more practical for my lifestyle and budget right now. But if I had my druthers I’d wear skirts most of the time, and hopefully in the future that’ll be the case.

But this is my opinion. If someone doesn’t agree, then they just don’t agree. If we’re all going to take everything personally and get offended, then I could reserve the right to be just as offended as everyone else by the people who disagree with me. See how foolish that would be?

Now if you had added “and I think every other woman should replace trousers by skirts (or dresses?)” then I would feel a judgement and feel offended at being judged for one outer characteristic. I would start to think that you were telling me that I did not understand/cared about modesty.

I would also think of the things I was expected to give up doing because they are either difficult/immodest to do in anything else than trousers/shorts. It also seems to me to be (intentionally or unintentionally) a way to restrict what women and girls can do. And I do get offended, very offended, at that intention.

 

[Vico]

We see some key thoughts in the Catechism, which people can use to make their own wise choices, using our intuition, without having to have a list prohibitions.

2521 Purity requires modesty,…

2522 Modesty … keeps silence or reserve where there is evident risk of unhealthy curiosity. It is discreet.

2523 … It protests, for example, against the voyeuristic explorations of the human body in certain advertisements … Modesty inspires a way of life which makes it possible to resist the allurements of fashion and the pressures of prevailing ideologies.

2524 The forms taken by modesty vary from one culture to another. Everywhere, however, modesty exists as an intuition of the spiritual dignity proper to man…

2525 … Purity of heart brings freedom from widespread eroticism and avoids entertainment inclined to voyeurism and illusion.

 

[ac_claire]

I still find it very difficult to understand how posters can say something like “only sluts wear short skirts” or “women who wear trousers are sinful” and not be making a judgment about those who wear them. It seems to me that the only way to avoid such judgement is to change what I wear or keep away from them.

Saying something like “I do not approve of women wearing trousers” does not have the same jimplication to me. It is someone giving an opinion. It’s not telling someone what to do. It always implies the other person has the right to their own view.

Hi again Salonika,

You’re right, the above examples are merely opinions. But even if someone said “only sluts wear short skirts” (and btw it needs to be said that nothing like that has been posted here) that would still only be an opinion. I mean, what else is it if not an opinion…? Is it an authoritative command? No, it’s someone expressing their views. As ill-conceived as they may be, that’s all they are.

People are responsible for what they post, but they’re not responsible for how other people choose to react to their posts.

Now if you had added “and I think every other woman should replace trousers by skirts (or dresses?)” then I would feel a judgement and feel offended at being judged for one outer characteristic. I would start to think that you were telling me that I did not understand/cared about modesty.

Ah but see, this is my point. Why would you think that? Obviously I don’t even know you. Whether I say you do or don’t understand modesty has no bearing on whether or not you do, in fact, understand modesty. And the fact that I don’t even know you should make it all irrelevent. No matter what, you know the truth about you.

I would also think of the things I was expected to give up doing because they are either difficult/immodest to do in anything else than trousers/shorts. It also seems to me to be (intentionally or unintentionally) a way to restrict what women and girls can do. And I do get offended, very offended, at that intention.

You wouldn’t be and aren’t expected to give up anything, and nothing/nobody is being restricted. This thread, this forum…All we are doing is exchanging words and opinions and ideas.

 

[Salonika]

Hi again claire

Thanks, you’ve got me thinking!
ac claire:

But even if someone said “only sluts wear short skirts” (and btw it needs to be said that nothing like that has been posted here) that would still only be an opinion. I mean, what else is it if not an opinion…? Is it an authoritative command?

Yes, it is only someone’s opinion but in some cases it is with the intention of changing other people’s views and preferably their behaviour. These are the posts I react to.
ac claire:

People are responsible for what they post, but they’re not responsible for how other people choose to react to their posts.

This reminds me that I see people’s reacton to my posts as PARTLY my responsibility. Maybe they wouldn’t have reacted the way they did if I had been more careful about how I said something, used better words, been less/more diplomatic etc.
ac claire:

Whether I say you do or don’t understand modesty has no bearing on whether or not you do, in fact, understand modesty. And the fact that I don’t even know you should make it all irrelevent. No matter what, you know the truth about you.

Think this comes from what I said above - I consider I am PARTLY responsible if someone doesn’t understand what I say. But then as you say, the reader also has a responsibility for how they read the post and reply and if they assume I have no sense of modesty and am unfeminine - then that is as likely to soke from their prejudice rather than what I say.
ac claire:

You wouldn’t be and aren’t expected to give up anything, and nothing/nobody is being restricted. This thread, this forum…All we are doing is exchanging words and opinions and ideas.

Then why do people post if it isn’t to influence other people?

 

[Auntie_M]

This is such an interesting thread and requires deep thought. I did some research on how our clothes became exclusively male or exclusively female.

The encylopedia, in describing “fashions” tell of a very different set of “exclusives”. There seems not to be any. The earliest day of Christ, man and women both wore the “tunic” with sandals.
The Middle Ages and Renassiance period the men wore tight fitting “hose” that extended from toe to waist, with only a short coat opened down the front to bare the male chest. (the crusaders wore similar attire)

The Greek women had long skirts with short mid-rifts and short sleeves. The African women wore clothing only on the bottom.

The “men” of court, judges, and lawyers wore wigs, some wore gowns (such as our graduation gowns are designed alike today).

US women started wearing pants during WWI when their husbands went off fighting for us all. The women had to take on "man’s work to keep food and shelter for their families.

Our Catechism does talk of modesty, but it is not just for women. Our church doesn’t make a reference as to whom it only applies to, so I would guess it applies to both male and female.

I guess "man’s clothing influenced fashion as bare chested, low hanging jeans beneath the rear or showing the rear. I haven’t seen many women going around bare chested or wearing their jeans so low their rears hang out.

Statitics show, Men are not raped who go around with their jeans half on or bare chested. Go figure???

 

[Ottaviani]

While I agree with various posters - that:
(a) lust and rape existed long before tight jeans and miniskirts;and
(b) seductive dress can/may be an occasion of sin - whether or not intentional -----

This was the point of my post, which was unfortunately taken WAY out of context.

 

[polkadots]

I must also add that the constant statement I hear about rape not being about lust, is patently false. People do not get aroused without lust, and do not want to have sex or rape anyone without lust. It is patently about lust. Other factors such as control, anger, etc. can be involved, but lust is patently and clearly a factor. The myth that it is not I find spread simply by people who do not want to admit that lust is a problem in society and that something has to be done about it to put a stop to rapes.

Don’t buy the myth. Don’t be fooled.

It is a fact that with the decrease in sexual morality in society and the change of fashions to provoke lust, rapes have exponentially increased. It is a fact that rapists are normally involved with pornography.

What is your basis for the top statement? Personal experience or empirical research. If you look at the research, sexual violence is mostly about violence and wanting to be in control.

I do agree with you about pornography, but I would add that the level of frustration pornography ignites more rage than lust.

 

[polkadots]

I don’t think many of the women here have considered this matter in a Catholic way, I have heard a lot of emotional and illogical statements, a sort of ‘I have no responsibility’ claim, ‘It’s all the man’s fault’. I have heard no one here say ‘It’s all the woman’s fault’ – why are there people complaining as if it has been said? far from it, instead what I constantly hear is, in spirit is ‘It’s all the man’s fault.’

Such selfishness, such lack of humility and modesty and charity, is not of the kingdom of God. You should be in the Confessional. I am saying it straight and saying it hard, because it is necessary, and I hope that those who emotionally can’t handle such statements will sit back and get themselves out of the equation and think about God instead.

That is what He calls us to do.

If my delivery of these truths is troubling to you, I am sorry that is the case – but the truths themselves, are true regardless of the delivery.

I haven’t read everyone’s responses, but I don’t think anyone is saying not to be modest. Obviously it is a virtue. I think women are troubled that men who struggle with lust, will not admit to a lust problem without dragging a woman into it.

What is more troubling about the whole modesty issue in my opinion is that women who dress this way are really seeking love and approval through sex or appearing sexy. The whole culture has a woman’s worth as being a sex object and has lured many women into believing that their only shot for finding love is through seduction.

Also, I think it is really funny when men get all angry and defensive and then accuse women of being emotional. Your response was very emotional. It’s kind of ironic, no?

 

[Salonika]

Shin:

I don’t think many of the women here have considered this matter in a Catholic way, I have heard a lot of emotional and illogical statements, a sort of ‘I have no responsibility’ claim, ‘It’s all the man’s fault’. I have heard no one here say ‘It’s all the woman’s fault’ – why are there people complaining as if it has been said? far from it, instead what I constantly hear is, in spirit is ‘It’s all the man’s fault.’

I’m puzzled about the claim that no one is saying it is the woman’s fault. Why a thread this size if there are not people who think women are at fault? Why go on and on about what women should and should not wear so that she is never an object of desire for any man.

Shin:

Such selfishness, such lack of humility and modesty and charity, is not of the kingdom of God. You should be in the Confessional. I am saying it straight and saying it hard, because it is necessary, and I hope that those who emotionally can’t handle such statements will sit back and get themselves out of the equation and think about God instead.

That is what He calls us to do.

Could put it another way

• whose being selfish - men who want all temptation removed from them or women who want to wear cloting appropriate for the situation?
• whose showing lack of humility and modesty - those who think they have the only answer to a situation, that the answer is always the same, or those who recognise that the situation is more complex?
• whose showing lack of charity - those who assume when they do not like what a woman is doing is that it is due to lack of modesty or those who do not make this assumption?

Shin:

If my delivery of these truths is troubling to you, I am sorry that is the case – but the truths themselves, are true regardless of the delivery.

Isn’t the delivery that troubles me, but your absolute certainly that you have the full and complete truth and that you have nothing to learn from anyone else.

And what exactly would you have us confessing?

 

[polkadots]

Salonika makes some very valid points.

 

[EasterJoy]

Statitics show, Men are not raped who go around with their jeans half on or bare chested. Go figure???

Statistics do show that rape is prevalent in men’s prisons, but not in women’s prisons.

Rape isn’t about sex. It is about asserting domination. It is a filthy sin.

Rape has little to do with modesty, excepting that a lack of modesty can allow someone to rationalize their objectification of the person and cements a warped view that makes people into things or sexuality into a vehicle by which competitions and power struggles are played out. That is no excuse, though.

 

[Voradin]

There hasn’t been any Church document that has come out on
Head dresses for women, so I wouldn’t say that people need to wear them.
The females in my family don’t, when we go to mass.
They were just designed so young men don’t get distracted,
I don’t find any distraction, and plus looking at a girl is okay.
Just as long as you still have your mind on god.

 

[EasterJoy]

There hasn’t been any Church document that has come out on
Head dresses for women, so I wouldn’t say that people need to wear them.
The females in my family don’t, when we go to mass.
They were just designed so young men don’t get distracted,
I don’t find any distraction, and plus looking at a girl is okay.
Just as long as you still have your mind on God.

What is and isn’t modest is going to have a cultural component to it, and of course we don’t want to be an occasion of sin, but I don’t think modesty primarily has to do with your responsibility for how other people see you.

I think it has to do with dressing to recognize you are a temple of the Holy Spirit, and one that God has been delighted to make a woman and not a man. You dress to reflect how God sees you.

It is good for each of us to share God’s delight in what he chose us to be, no matter what that was. Besides, if you are not around others who see you as an object when you dress more provocatively, you are still losing out on the edification they get if you reflect the dignity God gave you in how you dress.

This is why I think it important to encourage women who feel called to a stricter standard or even a more obviously feminine standard than others think necessary. If that is the witness God calls a woman to, then that is kind of like a professional religious call, although on a different plane of commitment. This is taking it for granted that it isn’t just a way to feel superior, but I haven’t really run into much of that. Just because of my actual experience with women who take a stricter standard, I think it is good not to just respect or tolerate that, but to encourage that.

 

[Voradin]

But if god sees our souls naked should we not go naked as well.
No; because humanity was instilled with shame and fear of others,
you would be frightened if a stranger saw you naked stepping out of a shower. Because you don’t know what he wants, it’s an instinct.

And also because it would be a disrespect to others,
but I don’t see how hair makes anyone aroused.

I believe we should dress for the occasion nothing more or less.

other than that

 

[Lainey63]

Yes this is the thread that never ends, yes it goes on and on my friends. Some people started blogging it not knowing what it was and they continue blogging it together just because…this is the thread that never ends…

(sung to the tune of Lambchops theme song) :bowdown2:

 

[Auntie_M]

]
Statistics do show that rape is prevalent in men’s prisons, but not in women’s prisons

.

Rape isn’t about sex. It is about asserting domination. It is a filthy sin.

Rape has little to do with modesty, excepting that a lack of modesty can allow someone to rationalize their objectification of the person and cements a warped view that makes people into things or sexuality into a vehicle by which competitions and power struggles are played out. That is no excuse, though.

I agree to most of all the above except let me expand on this a little.
I have bolded the above “statistical” statement. But I have to add that your are right about rape in men’s prisons. BUT, if women were in the same prisons, there would be more women being raped even with everyone wearing the same orange overalls. As in women’s prisons where they are raped even by the guards and most of these rapes go unnoticed and unreported…(the reason for such low statistics on these)

The men choose other men who are weaklings and they can overpower them. Not that they are sexually aroused by them.

Actually, most women who are raped are actually dressed nicely and modestly. They see these women as being “helpless” and an easy target. Whereas, women who dress more provacatively and powerfully are seen as a threat to these men. They may just fight back a little to much.

This is getting really way out there, isn’t it. Rape and domestic violence is not about what you have on. It is Totally about control and domination. Men who rape, beat, and kill women are not looking at their clothes. Wives get raped, beaten, and even killed by their husbands/boyfriends every 30 mintues in the US. Men like to instill fear and that, my friend, is the main reason. Fear, control, domination, etc. I worked with cases as this, and I know what the statistics show.

Ladies…if you are with a guy that dictates what you wear, be careful, be very careful. It may seem enduring right now. But, it won’t stop at just clothing. Statistically, men who can get a woman to wear “what he likes” is one of the first steps to master/slave domination. He’ll also tell you where you can go, how long you can stay, and with whom you go. You are giving over your entire life to this man. Control/domination is not love.
(and it certainly is not just his way of protecting you, as most women seem to think) Remember all the cults you have heard about and read about. The “leader” wants the women to wear long dresses, no make up, go around like a poor workhorse. UNTILL, he pulls her into his room at night. And she feels that she is pleasing him. Don’t get caught up in this trap. If anyone would like to learn more about domestic violence, beating and killing of women, and what to watch out for. Just ask me.

My heart goes out to all the Nuns who have been raped and killed all through history. They were certainly NOT dressing in an un-Catholic manner. Why then did it happen to them? Point made.

 

[Auntie_M]

Yes this is the thread that never ends, yes it goes on and on my friends. Some people started blogging it not knowing what it was and they continue blogging it together just because…this is the thread that never ends…

(sung to the tune of Lambchops theme song) :bowdown2:

I love Lambchops and Sherrie AND this song

 

[maggiemay2u]

Since we as Catholics strive to do our best to please the Lord, I thought most of us women would be very intrested in reading these articles. I know it opened my eyes a lot.

Of course we can choose, (because of Free Will) to do it or not.

Proper Dress and Behavior for Catholic Women
home | headcovering | modesty | dress | priesthood | roles | military ]

CATHOLIC MORAL DRESS CODE

catholicplanet.com/women/dress.htm

CATHOLIC APOLOGETICS
geocities.com/athens/rhodes/3543/dress.htm

When Christ walked the earth, the attire of men and women was kinda similar, wasn’t it? The only real difference (from the photo’s I’ve e seen ) seems to be the woman had her head covered.

Maybe we should return to this standard.

I’m all for modesty, and generally wear a skirt or dress at mass, but as long as a woman, or man, for that matter, is wearing clothes that represent the best she or he has, and could be worn in court, I’m good with it.