J
Jimzz12
Guest
I’ve seen the thread for the masculine faithful. Wondering what people say.
- Status
B
Brickmaker
Guest
You’ve been around here since August 08 and haven’t come upon a thread about Proper Dress for Catholic Women? That’s some kind of record
H
Holy_Anneliese
Guest
My rule is… if the bottom is so tight it’s cutting off your circulation and you can see underwear lines in the mirror, then it’s too tight to be modest. If you bend down and your shirt flaps open and you can see the grand canyon, then that’s not gonna work, either. If your shirt is so tight you have trouble breathing and can see the imprint of your stomach, then that’s too tight to be modest. Keep shirts up high and pant/skirt length longer. 
S
Shin
Guest
olfchapel.org/Rubrics/Rubrics.htm
We know from our Faith that Christ is present in the Blessed Sacrament, and that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is the most exalted form of worship given to us by God. In the Mass, it is Christ Who worships, Who adores, Who intercedes for us.
Given the lofty dignity of Holy Mass and the Presence of God in our Tabernacle, modesty and appropriate attire are required in our Chapel. Please observe, at a minimum, the following guidelines when attending Church services:
We know from our Faith that Christ is present in the Blessed Sacrament, and that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is the most exalted form of worship given to us by God. In the Mass, it is Christ Who worships, Who adores, Who intercedes for us.
Given the lofty dignity of Holy Mass and the Presence of God in our Tabernacle, modesty and appropriate attire are required in our Chapel. Please observe, at a minimum, the following guidelines when attending Church services:
Code:
* No T-shirts, jeans and other casual clothing that is unsuitable for Church
* No immodest tops or blouses should be worn
* Women and girls' skirts and dresses should cover the knee when seated
* Women and girls should cover their heads while at Mass out of modesty
H
Holy_Anneliese
Guest
My modesty rules for church are almost the same as the ones you stated… the ones I posted above are for my every day use. I follow all the ones you posted there except for (sometimes) the third one. That is definitely not to say that I wear mini skirts to Mass. That would be disgusting. But I have a lot of skirts that go to the knee and so when you sit they are resting just on top/above the knees.
C
Cat
Guest
The headcovering is no longer required. See this link to a CAF Apologist’s Answer: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=4222
J
Jimzz12
Guest
Just for the record I’m in an Italian parrish and well…
Le ragazze don’t typically dress anything but too tight and too revealing. As a single man around 30 it gets cumbersome. I usually just stare at the missalette.
Le ragazze don’t typically dress anything but too tight and too revealing. As a single man around 30 it gets cumbersome. I usually just stare at the missalette.
E
EnJoyslife
Guest
Regarding women wearing the veil. people mistakenly think that the reason women stopped wearing the veil is because of vatican II. They are mistaken. Jackie Kennedy started attending mass without her veil, and being the one that everyone was looking to at the time, women assumed that if the first lady wasn’t wearing a veil to mass then it must be okay for everyone else. Actually, the wearing of a veil is scriptural.
1Cor 11:4-10
“Any man who prays or prophesies with his head covered brings shame upon his head.
But any woman who prays or prophesies with her head unveiled brings shame upon her head, for it is one and the same thing as if she had had her head shaved.
For if a woman does not have her head veiled, she may as well have her hair cut off. But if it is shameful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, then she should wear a veil. A man, on the other hand, should not cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man.
For man did not come from woman, but woman from man;
nor was man created for woman, but woman for man; for this reason a woman should have a sign of authority on her head, because of the angels”
Attending mass can be considered being in prayer, therefore, it would be proper for a woman to wear a veil during mass. Either that or shave their heads as quoted in this scripture, which I would prefer not to do. This scripture is also the reason men should not wear hats or hoods, as I’ve been seeing the teens wearing lately, during mass.
1Cor 11:4-10
“Any man who prays or prophesies with his head covered brings shame upon his head.
But any woman who prays or prophesies with her head unveiled brings shame upon her head, for it is one and the same thing as if she had had her head shaved.
For if a woman does not have her head veiled, she may as well have her hair cut off. But if it is shameful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, then she should wear a veil. A man, on the other hand, should not cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man.
For man did not come from woman, but woman from man;
nor was man created for woman, but woman for man; for this reason a woman should have a sign of authority on her head, because of the angels”
Attending mass can be considered being in prayer, therefore, it would be proper for a woman to wear a veil during mass. Either that or shave their heads as quoted in this scripture, which I would prefer not to do. This scripture is also the reason men should not wear hats or hoods, as I’ve been seeing the teens wearing lately, during mass.
S
Shin
Guest
This is true. The angels do not change. Those who walk the path of shame or modesty do not change.
J
Jimzz12
Guest
I’m going to be honest.
When I lived in the Middle East it was easier to engage women by the fact that I wasn’t being distracted by the other stuff she’s got going on.
The shirts covered about to mid-thigh and were generally loose. Even the head covering thing is okay by me, as that’s not from mohammedism but from the african proto-culture – look at old pictures from 19th century western European backwaters. The face covering thing. I’m not such a fan about. You never know what the facial expressions are sayings.
In the US, it takes a lot more observation to determine if you are attracted to her. As it stands in the United States the average normal man takes about 45 minutes to figure if he’s attracted versus the average of less then 2 minutes for women in their determination.
In the middle-east, that time was significantly decreased. I could watch her behavoir and infer quite a bit just focusing on her and not her clothes. It really is a distraction when you don’t know how you’re supposed to react.
Now, I’ve heard women tell me the very purpose for wearing revealing clothes is two-fold. One, it’s a challenge against other women and to feel pretty or cute, etc. Two, to determine which men are comfortable around women.
My complaint on these two aspects is directed that women are already attractive. If they need to feel attractive ask the opinion of men. They will give you strength. Dressing to kill, as they say, is really just the sins of the lust of the eyes, and the lust of pride coming forth. Also, it is inherently unfair to men to base them on their comfortability when the purpose of a women is to empower men with their compassion and charity. True some women are honest and seek men they can be compassionate toward. But, US society as a whole doesn’t engage that purpose ordained in womanhood of strengthening their men. To cull men from the herd based on the notion of false confidence is truly disordered.
It’s well-known that statistically rapists and child molesters are married men, or men in aparently monogamous, or serial monagamous relationships. The men with power seek more control and they are empowered further from the accepted mode of fashion and courtship. I truly believe we have lost quite too much in recent years. We have no courtship rituals. Or, at least in my bad-old days I’ve never needed any courtship ritual.
My father tells me how when he was young man all the women and all the men would get together and socialize in one spot once per week (Friday night) and if she liked you she told you to be there next week. There were no phone calls or the obligatory three dates. It didn’t cost hundreds of dollars buying strangers dinner and movies, taxi fares, etc. He says she just wanted to meet and that was all that was expected. Moreover, he said there were Masses for single men and women. You could meet each other after Mass on Saturday evening. These were sponsored events. Now, I have heard complaints that if we still sponsored singles Masses then all the men and women will be distracted. Well, I say ladies if he’s distracted it tells you he isn’t the guy for you. Not being distracted would reveal his confidence in the Mass.
When I lived in the Middle East it was easier to engage women by the fact that I wasn’t being distracted by the other stuff she’s got going on.
The shirts covered about to mid-thigh and were generally loose. Even the head covering thing is okay by me, as that’s not from mohammedism but from the african proto-culture – look at old pictures from 19th century western European backwaters. The face covering thing. I’m not such a fan about. You never know what the facial expressions are sayings.
In the US, it takes a lot more observation to determine if you are attracted to her. As it stands in the United States the average normal man takes about 45 minutes to figure if he’s attracted versus the average of less then 2 minutes for women in their determination.
In the middle-east, that time was significantly decreased. I could watch her behavoir and infer quite a bit just focusing on her and not her clothes. It really is a distraction when you don’t know how you’re supposed to react.
Now, I’ve heard women tell me the very purpose for wearing revealing clothes is two-fold. One, it’s a challenge against other women and to feel pretty or cute, etc. Two, to determine which men are comfortable around women.
My complaint on these two aspects is directed that women are already attractive. If they need to feel attractive ask the opinion of men. They will give you strength. Dressing to kill, as they say, is really just the sins of the lust of the eyes, and the lust of pride coming forth. Also, it is inherently unfair to men to base them on their comfortability when the purpose of a women is to empower men with their compassion and charity. True some women are honest and seek men they can be compassionate toward. But, US society as a whole doesn’t engage that purpose ordained in womanhood of strengthening their men. To cull men from the herd based on the notion of false confidence is truly disordered.
It’s well-known that statistically rapists and child molesters are married men, or men in aparently monogamous, or serial monagamous relationships. The men with power seek more control and they are empowered further from the accepted mode of fashion and courtship. I truly believe we have lost quite too much in recent years. We have no courtship rituals. Or, at least in my bad-old days I’ve never needed any courtship ritual.
My father tells me how when he was young man all the women and all the men would get together and socialize in one spot once per week (Friday night) and if she liked you she told you to be there next week. There were no phone calls or the obligatory three dates. It didn’t cost hundreds of dollars buying strangers dinner and movies, taxi fares, etc. He says she just wanted to meet and that was all that was expected. Moreover, he said there were Masses for single men and women. You could meet each other after Mass on Saturday evening. These were sponsored events. Now, I have heard complaints that if we still sponsored singles Masses then all the men and women will be distracted. Well, I say ladies if he’s distracted it tells you he isn’t the guy for you. Not being distracted would reveal his confidence in the Mass.
C
Cat
Guest
So you are ignoring the answer of the CAF apologist? There are plenty of other questions in the apologists’ section about this same topic, and every answer is the same: there is no longer a requirement for women to wear the veil during Mass. So as I understand it, you disagree with CAF and will continue to tell women that CAF (and for that matter, most bishops in the U.S. ) is wrong regarding the veil?
To be honest, I would rather take my bishop’s word than yours.
A
Anno_Domini
Guest
I personally agree with everything that you’ve said except for covering your head. I don’t care whether your a Boy Scout, military man, or a woman. No matter whether your hat is part of your uniform or not, there is no need for you to have a covering over your head for Church. Also, when you said that women should cover their heads out of respect, taking your hats off (for men and women) is also respectful. Finally, no offense, but when you brought up the idea, the first image that came to mind was colonial Massachusetts with all of the women wearing bonnets. I understand what you’re saying, and you’re not entirely wrong, nor am I. I just personally feel that no hats, except when it is part of religious garb for the clergy, should be worn in Church, as you are showing your humility, reverence, and respect for God.
J
Jimzz12
Guest
While her husband was president, Laura Bush and her daughters always wore a mantilla (veil) when they entered Catholic churches. Even when they went to Castile Gandolfo. That actually shows you that, although, not required by the letter of the law, it is a classy thing to do.
I mean it is ridiculous to think it is sinful not to wear one. The crown of the head is glorious on both men and women, but culture considerations should be taken into consideration. This is in accordance with the Catechism.
Perhaps this is why the the mainstream publications right wingers and yankee New Englanders editorialize the Bush family “closet papists” and “romish sympathizers”.
You’ll have to excuse me I’m reading Massimo Franco’s book dealing with anti-Catholicism in American high-society, judiciary, and the foreign service. Did anyone ever answer Sec. Clinton’s question: “Who painted it?”
A
ac_claire
Guest
To the OP…the Proper dress for Catholic Men thread was started in reaction to the orginal thread, which was Proper Dress for Catholic Women. You know, all things must be “equal”… 
To those who are already getting offended by the mention of women covering their heads at Mass…Nobody has said that the Church still requires women to cover their heads. But it is still a (small t) tradition of the Faith, and the reasons why it was a good and holy thing to do back in the day still exist now. It was never, “women must cover their heads simply because the Magisterium says so!” There were reasons, Scriptural and theological reasons why it was required. And just because canon law doesn’t require it anymore, doesn’t mean those reasons have been abrogated. They are as timeless as the Church itself. Therefore, it is still a good and holy thing for women to do. :byzsoc: :nun2:
Other than that, relax. Nobody is trying to force anyone to do anything they don’t want to do. No need to look for battles where there are none.
To those who are already getting offended by the mention of women covering their heads at Mass…Nobody has said that the Church still requires women to cover their heads. But it is still a (small t) tradition of the Faith, and the reasons why it was a good and holy thing to do back in the day still exist now. It was never, “women must cover their heads simply because the Magisterium says so!” There were reasons, Scriptural and theological reasons why it was required. And just because canon law doesn’t require it anymore, doesn’t mean those reasons have been abrogated. They are as timeless as the Church itself. Therefore, it is still a good and holy thing for women to do. :byzsoc: :nun2:
Other than that, relax. Nobody is trying to force anyone to do anything they don’t want to do. No need to look for battles where there are none.
S
slyboots
Guest
Question: Do those of you who do veil for Mass and other times before the blessed sacrament also do so when praying, say a family rosary? Or is only for the times we are in His Blessed presence?
This is not a trick question incidentally. I veil for mass myself and am one of the few at our NO masses to do so.
This is not a trick question incidentally. I veil for mass myself and am one of the few at our NO masses to do so.
A
ac_claire
Guest
Right now I only cover my head at Mass or before the Blessed Sacrament, but I’ve been thinking for awhile that I maybe should start doing it whenever I pray at home too. I’ve been thinking it but haven’t implemented it yet.
S
slyboots
Guest
Back to the actual topic:
I am by no means prudish. I have in my life worn outlandishly revealing clothing which should have embarrassed me. But even I knew not to wear that kind of thing to church.
I am not judging the young women as bad people I saw today. I think they are just unaware of how much they are showing. They are nice girls for the most part I am sure. And their parents brought them up right or they probably would not have been in Mass.
But the verylow necklines showing cleavage for at least 1-2", the skirts which hardly covered their behinds, and the tattoos on the arms, “lower backs” and shoulders seemed out of place in Mass.
Yes I veil. but I think of that as a personal choice to do what St Paul discussed. I do not expect anyone to do the same based on my decision. I am a grandmother. I wear comfortable clothes so I would not expect them to wear clothing which was not pleasant to wear.
But how can it be pleasant to feel you have to tug your skirt down several times when standing and kneeling? Or that your neckline reveals significantly more when you bend over or lean forward to accept the chalice? Or that your pants are cut so low that when you sit in the pew you show the lovely roses you have taken pains to have printed on your backside?
These were not just teens or young girls either. There were women of ages greater than 21 years with these same situations.
I realize that when I was younger I was trying to show my attributes with the intention of making my boyfriends and later my husband see me as sexy. But that just doesn’t seem to be necessary in an Easter or any other Mass.
I just wish they could see themselves really.
I am by no means prudish. I have in my life worn outlandishly revealing clothing which should have embarrassed me. But even I knew not to wear that kind of thing to church.
I am not judging the young women as bad people I saw today. I think they are just unaware of how much they are showing. They are nice girls for the most part I am sure. And their parents brought them up right or they probably would not have been in Mass.
But the verylow necklines showing cleavage for at least 1-2", the skirts which hardly covered their behinds, and the tattoos on the arms, “lower backs” and shoulders seemed out of place in Mass.
Yes I veil. but I think of that as a personal choice to do what St Paul discussed. I do not expect anyone to do the same based on my decision. I am a grandmother. I wear comfortable clothes so I would not expect them to wear clothing which was not pleasant to wear.
But how can it be pleasant to feel you have to tug your skirt down several times when standing and kneeling? Or that your neckline reveals significantly more when you bend over or lean forward to accept the chalice? Or that your pants are cut so low that when you sit in the pew you show the lovely roses you have taken pains to have printed on your backside?
These were not just teens or young girls either. There were women of ages greater than 21 years with these same situations.
I realize that when I was younger I was trying to show my attributes with the intention of making my boyfriends and later my husband see me as sexy. But that just doesn’t seem to be necessary in an Easter or any other Mass.
I just wish they could see themselves really.
C
ConservativeOne
Guest
I won’t go into whether it’s sinful or not for women to wear a headcovering in Church. However, in the case of Laura Bush wearing a mantilla at Castile Gondolfo - my guess is she was following protocol. It’s been a longstanding rule that women cover their heads during an audience with the Pope. I don’t know particulars - but I’m sure the President’s wife had been well-informed prior to the Papal audience.
However, it’s not only “classy” - it’s beautiful. And while some don’t see the need for it, I think it’s lovely - a mantilla or veil is not only respectful as regards being in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament, it’s a uniquely lovely way for women to display their femininity (for lack of better expression!) Sorry, I couldn’t think of a better way to say it.
V
Vivivic
Guest
I have a question over this whole “proper attire” issue. I am a married mother of three. I attend mass several times a week. I always wear a mantilla while in the presence of our Lord. Over the past few years I have made an effort to add dresses to my closet so that I can be dressed my best for Sunday mass. I live in a hot climate. Some of my dresses have thin straps or halters, but there is never any cleavage showing. My dresses have full skirts that reach to the knee. Lately a few women have felt the need to comment on my attire. Saying that spaghetti straps are inappropriate, no hater tops, blah, blah, blah. If you have spaghetti straps that can barely hold up your top or if your halter is displaying your “wears” yes it is inappropriate, but if your clothing is tasteful and modest shouldn’t it be okay?
P
PatriceA
Guest
Our parish published guidelines for church attire for the summer recently, and bare shoulders were advised to be unacceptable. So according to their guidelines, your spaghetti straps and halter tops would not be appropriate.
- Status