Summer attire at Mass

[severus68]

Nearly every picture of a man meeting the Pope shows the male dignitary in a dark suit. Same for the women in a knee length dress or skirt with a black veil (or mantilla) and covered from the neck to the knees.

If I had the chance to meet the Holy Father privately, I would be wearing a long sleeved black shirt, a black skirt with a length goes below the knees or longer with a black veil or mantilla on my head.

Good for you, wear what you want to wear.

 

[TrueLight]

Who ever said you had to be ‘dressed to the nines?’

Let’s say that you normally wear to work dress pants and a blouse. For daily mass, same thing. For Sunday Mass, wear a knee length skirt and a blouse. If you really cannot stand skirts or have issues with spider veins etc., then wear dress pants and a blazer over a blouse/top if the weather is cool, and dress pants with a lightweight but not sheer top, and accessorize. Wear a cross necklace or lapel pin. Tie a silk scarf and tack it with an angel pin.

Now, what if you normally wear scrubs or denim to work? Then if you have the time to change for daily Mass, again, put on a pair of dressy slacks, or a simple skirt, and blouse. If you don’t have time to change, then wearing work clothes is perfectly appropriate so long as they are clean and modest.

And for Sunday Mass, assuming you aren’t working that day, that’s the time to do as the above --dressy pants or skirt, blouse, necklace, pin, scarf. A little more pulled together to show that Mass is something you prepared for outwardly to reflect, of course, that you are also preparing yourself inwardly.

Now those ‘dress pants’ do not have to be $100 designer things. I’m sure you’ll probably recognize "Alfred Dunner’ as a designer for attractive pant and top outfits that look dressy but are not expensive (hello, Blair catalog), often found on sale. Clean, reasonably priced, attractive, and modest, and fit a variety of sizes.

As for the jewelry, quite often (ask my mother) various religious groups will send necklaces, rosaries, pins etc. for free. If you don’t get them in your mail, you probably have friends who do and would be delighted to give you some.

That’s my take on it FWIW.

 

[Walking_Home]

Tantum ergo:

Yes, Christ taught humility. Not false humility, not a ‘modern Western’ idea that absolutely nothing was to be considered preparing for.

And part of preparing for something special is dressing for that. And that is the case whether you’re talking of prehistoric man, Egyptians of the 20th century before Christ, Chinese in AD 400, serfs in AD 1100 Europe, Muslims of the 14th century, South American tribes of the 17th century, Inuits in the 19th century, most people in the early 20th century. . .

All had as a part of preparation for something ‘outside the ordinary’ the idea that one prepared oneself inside and outside. Not simply inside, not simply outside, but both.

Why did that aspect of humanity disappear in some subgroups of a few areas of the U.S. in the last 40 years or so? And why do they think this is such a good thing?

Isn’t Mass and the possible reception of Christ in the Eucharist something we should be preparing for inside and out? If not, why not? I’d like to know.

Dressing up is what we do, to look attractive for ourselves, to show celebration, to attract the opposite sex, sometimes for vanity, when we are required too. It has nothing to do with Christ, it has nothing to do with holiness.

We should look forward to receiving Christ and prepare ourselves internally. If some want to dress up to show outwardly their excitement and happiness, it is their right. Christ would not care if we received in sackcloth.

---

 

[TrueLight]

Dressing up is what we do, to look attractive for ourselves, to show celebration, to attract the opposite sex, sometimes for vanity, when we are required too. It has nothing to do with Christ, it has nothing to do with holiness.

We should look forward to receiving Christ and prepare ourselves internally. If some want to dress up to show outwardly their excitement and happiness, it is their right. Christ would not care if we received in sackcloth.

You all know the story of how King David saw Bathsheba, the soldier Uriah’s wife and wanted her, so he sent Uriah to the frontline in hopes he would be killed and he was indeed killed at battle. So David took Bathsheba for his wife. David and Bathsheba had a son.

The Lord was angry at what David had done and so struck the child. While the child was ill and dying, David fasted and dressed in sackcloth.

**2 Samuel 12: **

16 David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying(AD) in sackcloth** on the ground. 17 The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused,(AE) and he would not eat any food with them.(AF)

18 On the seventh day the child died. David’s attendants were afraid to tell him that the child was dead, for they thought, “While the child was still living, he wouldn’t listen to us when we spoke to him. How can we now tell him the child is dead? He may do something desperate.”

19 David noticed that his attendants were whispering among themselves, and he realized the child was dead. “Is the child dead?” he asked.

“Yes,” they replied, “he is dead.”

20 Then David got up from the ground. After** he had washed,(AG) put on lotions and changed his clothes,(AH) he went into the house of the Lord and worshiped. Then he went to his own house, and at his request they served him food, and he ate.

Now David could have gone directly into the temple in his sackcloth, worshiped God, then came home and changed. Oh no, he got himself smelling good and dressed nicely to go in the temple.

Now I know some of you are going to say this passage has nothing to do with what we are discussing. But it does.

 

[superamazingman]

You all know the story of how King David saw Bathsheba, the soldier Uriah’s wife and wanted her, so he sent Uriah to the frontline in hopes he would be killed and he was indeed killed at battle. So David took Bathsheba for his wife. David and Bathsheba had a son.

The Lord was angry at what David had done and so struck the child. While the child was ill and dying, David fasted and dressed in sackcloth.

**2 Samuel 12: **

Now David could have gone directly into the temple in his sackcloth, worshiped God, then came home and changed. Oh no, he got himself smelling good and dressed nicely to go in the temple.

Now I know some of you are going to say this passage has nothing to do with what we are discussing. But it does.

Excellent point. The old testament is so awesome.

There’s also some other good old testament passages to pull out when people complain about priests wearing expensive vestments.

 

[severus68]

You all know the story of how King David saw Bathsheba, the soldier Uriah’s wife and wanted her, so he sent Uriah to the frontline in hopes he would be killed and he was indeed killed at battle. So David took Bathsheba for his wife. David and Bathsheba had a son.

The Lord was angry at what David had done and so struck the child. While the child was ill and dying, David fasted and dressed in sackcloth.

**2 Samuel 12: **

Now David could have gone directly into the temple in his sackcloth, worshiped God, then came home and changed. Oh no, he got himself smelling good and dressed nicely to go in the temple.

Now I know some of you are going to say this passage has nothing to do with what we are discussing. But it does.

David was following Jewish custom. It would have been better if he had not lusted and had not sent a man to his death to satisfy his lust.

 

[superamazingman]

David was following Jewish custom. It would have been better if he had not lusted and had not sent a man to his death to satisfy his lust.

You’re missing the entire point! The point was, he needed to go to the temple (as we do each week) and dressed up (as we should).

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Who ever said you had to be ‘dressed to the nines?’

Let’s say that you normally wear to work dress pants and a blouse. For daily mass, same thing. For Sunday Mass, wear a knee length skirt and a blouse. If you really cannot stand skirts or have issues with spider veins etc., then wear dress pants and a blazer over a blouse/top if the weather is cool, and dress pants with a lightweight but not sheer top, and accessorize. Wear a cross necklace or lapel pin. Tie a silk scarf and tack it with an angel pin.

Now, what if you normally wear scrubs or denim to work? Then if you have the time to change for daily Mass, again, put on a pair of dressy slacks, or a simple skirt, and blouse. If you don’t have time to change, then wearing work clothes is perfectly appropriate so long as they are clean and modest.

And for Sunday Mass, assuming you aren’t working that day, that’s the time to do as the above --dressy pants or skirt, blouse, necklace, pin, scarf. A little more pulled together to show that Mass is something you prepared for outwardly to reflect, of course, that you are also preparing yourself inwardly.

Now those ‘dress pants’ do not have to be $100 designer things. I’m sure you’ll probably recognize "Alfred Dunner’ as a designer for attractive pant and top outfits that look dressy but are not expensive (hello, Blair catalog), often found on sale. Clean, reasonably priced, attractive, and modest, and fit a variety of sizes.

As for the jewelry, quite often (ask my mother) various religious groups will send necklaces, rosaries, pins etc. for free. If you don’t get them in your mail, you probably have friends who do and would be delighted to give you some.

That’s my take on it FWIW.

Now see that is where people lose me. I wear Sunday what I wear during the rest of the week…Docker type pants and a blouse or sweater. I am allergic to polyester/nylon…so no Alfred dunner. I mention the overweight thing because many people do not realize that there are those of us who are really hourglass…small waist…large hips/thighs. I have NEVER been able to buy things in a catalog/ nor thrift store.

Skirts/dresses/scarfs/pins…all too frilly for me

So now I’m not doing my best? Because it doesn’t follow what others do? Or some of what others do?

I’ve seen some older ladies dressed like that…sadly those same ladies are those who like to chat while I am trying to pray…

Doesn’t mean I’m not prepared for Mass…especially as on Sat and Sunday (we got to both) we arrive early to allow ourselves time to pray and reflect before Mass.

Sadly I do not have that luxury for daily Mass.

 

[Rkdajr]

I would expect the “Jesus doesn’t care” argument from teenagers, but not adults…And as a teen I’m surprised at how much complaining there is about dressing up, even the minimum. It’s not that Our Lord would care, it’s that we should care, so please stop using that as an excuse.

Annabelle_Marie made me think to make a picture on where I draw the line like the Vatican clothing rules sign - i1096.photobucket.com/albums/g330/Rkdajr/c-3.png.

Sleeveless tops/dresses, some capri-like pants, and dressy sandals for women seem okay to me, but others might not think so. I think the main trouble is in the last example though, like shorts, regular t-shirts, men’s sandals, etc., but I think everyone can agree that anything lower is inappropriate. I just want to know why people can’t dress the minimum for one hour in the presence of Our Lord, that’s all.

So now I’m not doing my best? Because it doesn’t follow what others do? Or some of what others do?
.

You seem to dress fine to me I think we can ignore the part about having to wear pins or scarfs, that was strange.

Irishpatrick, I enjoyed all your (name removed by moderator)ut by the way, thank you.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

I would expect the “Jesus doesn’t care” argument from teenagers, but not adults…And as a teen I’m surprised at how much complaining there is about dressing up, even the minimum. It’s not that Our Lord would care, it’s that we should care, so please stop using that as an excuse.

Annabelle_Marie made me think to make a picture on where I draw the line like the Vatican clothing rules sign - i1096.photobucket.com/albums/g330/Rkdajr/c-3.png.

Sleeveless tops/dresses for women and dressy sandals seem okay to me, but others might not think so. I think the main trouble is in the last one though, like shorts, regular t-shirts, men’s sandals, etc., but I think everyone can agree that anything lower is inappropriate. I just want to know why people can’t dress the minimum for one hour in the presence of Our Lord, that’s all.

You seem to dress fine to me I think we can ignore the part about having to wear pins or scarfs, that was strange.

Irishpatrick, I enjoyed all your (name removed by moderator)ut by the way, thank you.

Mass or no Mass…can someone tell me why people let their young girls out in those really short shorts? Maybe it’s my age but I have underwear that covers more then those shorts:blush:

 

[holyghost]

This thread reminds me of one time, I went to mass wearing a sweater with my college name on it. After mass, when I was totally blissed out after receiving the Lord, a man came up to me and said “Oh, you go to THAT school…where all the women dress immodestly. You need to advocate for the school to make changes in their dress code…” He proceeded to make negative comments about the school and the women that attend there, and my “duty” to become involved somehow…
All the while, I was thinking to myself, these things were the last things on MY mind, and the first things on his. Really put it into perspective for me: clean your own house before trying to clean everywhere else!

 

[severus68]

You’re missing the entire point! The point was, he needed to go to the temple (as we do each week) and dressed up (as we should).

Really?? The point is that he was following Jewish custom. Muslims wash too before they enter a mosque to pray.

 

[MissRose73]

The point of the passage posted about King David means to me even though he committed a sin (a bad one to be honest), he still had to go to the Temple, and made sure he was dressed decently especially if he was not supposed to go there wearing sackcloth. I am sure he had to confess his sin anyways even if he did so alone.

I just wished the Vatican dress code sign was put out at more churches. People would think twice before showing in short or revealing clothes which seems to more prevalent this days. I don’t mind as an example a woman wearing a black dress that is a sheath style, as long as it at least reaches the top of her knees and is not tight/revealing, then I don’t mind. Its the styles of clothes that expose lots of cleavage, shoulders and legs that do not belong at Mass at all.

 

[johnnyjones]

Mass or no Mass…can someone tell me why people let their young girls out in those really short shorts? Maybe it’s my age but I have underwear that covers more then those shorts:blush:

Unfortunately most young girls are brainwashed by the culture that looking " sexy" is the most important thing and the parents just go along with it. They don’t want to conflict with the teenager or young adult because it creates waves and “every other teenager is wearing it”.

 

[Cat]

The point of the passage posted about King David means to me even though he committed a sin (a bad one to be honest), he still had to go to the Temple, and made sure he was dressed decently especially if he was not supposed to go there wearing sackcloth. I am sure he had to confess his sin anyways even if he did so alone.

I just wished the Vatican dress code sign was put out at more churches. People would think twice before showing in short or revealing clothes which seems to more prevalent this days. I don’t mind as an example a woman wearing a black dress that is a sheath style, as long as it at least reaches the top of her knees and is not tight/revealing, then I don’t mind. Its the styles of clothes that expose lots of cleavage, shoulders and legs that do not belong at Mass at all.

I think we have to seriously consider the possibility that in this day and age in the United States, such a sign would probably result in a great deal of attrition from the parish, and unfortunately, those who are left are often unable to increase their financial contributions to make up for the loss. This hurts the parish by causing a loss of programs, which causes even more attrition.

Even though attrition seems like it might be a good thing, is it really? It means that Catholics are not attending Mass, and therefore are at much greater risk of losing their souls and going to hell. Is that really a good thing?

Our parish did the right thing several years ago in a matter of morals–nothing to do with dress code, BTW–it was a more serious issue involving grave sin. Dozens of people left the parish, including most of the really “good” musicians. It’s been seven years now and they have not come back. Yes, we might argue that it’s for the best that these people left, since they obviously were in disagreement with Holy Mother Church about morals and grave sin. But their loss DID hurt the Church financially and IMO, musically. There really haven’t been a lot of “replacements” stepping up. And of course, most of these people are no longer in Catholic churches, which means that they aren’t in the Presence of the Lord Jesus Christ and thus are in danger of hellfire.

It seems to me that there are two ways local parishes can handle their parish life.

1. They can crack down on the very littlest issues; e.g., dress code. The philosophy behind this is actually a good one–nip rebellious behavior in the bud before it escalates and becomes serious sin. A lot of parents follow this guideline in their childrearing practices–you don’t let children get away with “little” infractions because then the kids will push the boundaries and test the parents until the infraction becomes so unacceptable that the parents have to step in, but by then, it’s too late.
2. They can overlook simple issues; e.g., dress code, and save the “battles” for the big issues; e.g., open celebration of homosexuality by parishioners. This is also a good philosophy that many parents use. It is good for parents to choose which hills they are willing to die on, e;g., drug use, school attendance, etc. and forget about the little hills like makeup, fashions, and cleaning a bedroom.

I think that each pastor, as the “father” of his parish, has to make a decision about which approach will work best in his parish.

I think that the first approach will work best in some parishes, while the second approach will work best in other parishes. I don’t think there is a “RIGHT” approach.

 

[pnewton]

Yet, we should care, we are supposed to help build each other up. It is not about sin, or judgment

Then you can care about others’ dress, if it please you. I will simply do not, nor am I under any obligation to play at clothing police. I have bigger beams to fry.

 

[englishredrose]

You all know the story of how King David saw Bathsheba, the soldier Uriah’s wife and wanted her, so he sent Uriah to the frontline in hopes he would be killed and he was indeed killed at battle. So David took Bathsheba for his wife. David and Bathsheba had a son.

The Lord was angry at what David had done and so struck the child. While the child was ill and dying, David fasted and dressed in sackcloth.

**2 Samuel 12: **

Now David could have gone directly into the temple in his sackcloth, worshiped God, then came home and changed. Oh no, he got himself smelling good and dressed nicely to go in the temple.

Now I know some of you are going to say this passage has nothing to do with what we are discussing. But it does.

But are we not living by the New Testament. Funny how we find the Old Testament useful to support our argument when we see fit. Now I am one who is thankful I do no thave to live by the Old Testament these days… Can you find a passage in the New Testament to support your claim… too

 

[pnewton]

But are we not living by the New Testament. Funny how we find the Old Testament useful to support our argument when we see fit. Now I am one who is thankful I do no thave to live by the Old Testament these days… Can you find a passage in the New Testament to support your claim… too

Easily done. Just go to 2 Timothy 3:16 and read what Paul said:

All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness

Remembering that the only Scripture that existed for Timothy and Paul was the Old Testament, we simply can not say that we live by the New. Paul clearly says that what is found in the Old Testament is still profitable for teaching and training in righteousness. Thus, one can not be a New Testament* only* Christian without cutting out sections like the verse above and throwing it in the garbage.

 

[severus68]

Easily done. Just go to 2 Timothy 3:16 and read what Paul said:

All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness

Remembering that the only Scripture that existed for Timothy and Paul was the Old Testament, we simply can not say that we live by the New. Paul clearly says that what is found in the Old Testament is still profitable for teaching and training in righteousness. Thus, one can not be a New Testament* only* Christian without cutting out sections like the verse above and throwing it in the garbage.

While most of what you say is not wrong, I think englishredrose is right too. While we should not disregard the OT completely, we are followers of Christ and His teachings. Christ made a new covenant with men and His greatest commandment was love. We are supposed to follow and live accordance to the teachings of Christ. We do not for example, adhere to the rules for punishments for wrongdoings contained in the OT.

Neither are we required to wash/bath before going to church/praying to God.

 

[irishpatrick]

A thought strikes me.

We read of Jesus’ “Bread of Life” discourse in the Gospel of John, chapter six. In that discourse Jesus teaches that we must eat His Body if we are to have life within in us. Many people could not handle His teachings, so they left Him because the teachings were hard. Jesus did not call out to them or run after them to make them return, nor did He change His mind and say He was only using a metaphor.

Well, this forum conversation, and a hundred others, can be treated similarily. Jesus made His point many times in that discourse, and then He let it go. He allowed it to be up to each person to decide if what He taught was worthy to follow.

We have pounded this subject of clothes into the ground, and then back again, and again, and again. I think both sides know the points from each side. Either the points made about dressing well for Mass makes sense to people, or they do not.

No amount of additional discussion will change any person’s mind, and while this subject is nowhere near the importance of Jesus’ “Bread of Life” discourse, we can learn a lesson from our Lord–we should let people decide for themselves after we have thorougly presented our case, and the case for wearing nice clothes to Mass has been made–let everyone now decide for themselves!