Sunday Best? Church Leaders Blush at "Casual Catholic" Dress

[Tantum_ergo]

Now, if I were in a rural area where the majority of the people wore jeans, I likewise would not be ‘scandalized’ if the good Father wore jeans under his vestments because up until Mass he had been out helping gather in the harvest or chopping firewood or helping put up a house for somebody.

Or if as you say Father had not intended to say Mass that day and had been on his ‘day off’ and was called in at the last second, again, no problem with jeans under vestments. I’d assume, if I even noticed (sometimes I bless the Lord for making me so short sighted that I really don’t ‘see’ things so ‘far away’ as what’s under vestments!) that Father was wearing jeans for just such a reason–no chance or opportunity to be wearing anything else.

But yes, I would be scandalized if, alone among all the parishes of a given diocese, one priest decided to ‘forego vestments’. I would be scandalized if, alone among all Christian countries, the U.S. bishops decided to ‘off’ the vestments without even an indult. IOW --if the NORM for Catholic priests is to wear vestments, as it has been for many centuries, and that NORM is not changed by the Holy Father and the Magesterium, then no individual bishop or priest has the RIGHT to make those changes in defiance of the Church. So it WOULD be scandalous.

IF however the Holy Father and all the bishops got together and the Holy Spirit led them (perhaps because in the future only ‘cotton jeans and T shirts’ will be permitted to humanity by our Computer Overlords ) and determined that since all humans now wore exactly the same clothing and it would ‘scandalize’ people to have priests wear anything ‘different’ and the Church determined that Mass would be led by a priest in jeans and T among his flock all of whom were dressed in jeans and Ts. . .then it wouldn’t be a scandal.

Because it is not the article of clothing --provided it is modest and decent–that has ever been in question --it has always been the question of obedience to the Church and its teachings.

 

[CMatt25]

Now, if I were in a rural area where the majority of the people wore jeans, I likewise would not be ‘scandalized’ if the good Father wore jeans under his vestments because up until Mass he had been out helping gather in the harvest or chopping firewood or helping put up a house for somebody.

Or if as you say Father had not intended to say Mass that day and had been on his ‘day off’ and was called in at the last second, again, no problem with jeans under vestments. I’d assume, if I even noticed (sometimes I bless the Lord for making me so short sighted that I really don’t ‘see’ things so ‘far away’ as what’s under vestments!) that Father was wearing jeans for just such a reason–no chance or opportunity to be wearing anything else.

But yes, I would be scandalized if, alone among all the parishes of a given diocese, one priest decided to ‘forego vestments’. I would be scandalized if, alone among all Christian countries, the U.S. bishops decided to ‘off’ the vestments without even an indult. IOW --if the NORM for Catholic priests is to wear vestments, as it has been for many centuries, and that NORM is not changed by the Holy Father and the Magesterium, then no individual bishop or priest has the RIGHT to make those changes in defiance of the Church. So it WOULD be scandalous.

IF however the Holy Father and all the bishops got together and the Holy Spirit led them (perhaps because in the future only ‘cotton jeans and T shirts’ will be permitted to humanity by our Computer Overlords ) and determined that since all humans now wore exactly the same clothing and it would ‘scandalize’ people to have priests wear anything ‘different’ and the Church determined that Mass would be led by a priest in jeans and T among his flock all of whom were dressed in jeans and Ts. . .then it wouldn’t be a scandal.

Because it is not the article of clothing --provided it is modest and decent–that has ever been in question --it has always been the question of obedience to the Church and its teachings.

Tantum are you scandalized that the Church allows some countries to transfer holy feast days to Sun and others not?

And how can you say the article of clothing has not been in question? Tantum, on threads like this throughout CAF, people have been critical of wearing jeans, shorts, sneakers to Mass. On this thread alone people have commented about not wearing to Mass, gym shoes or what you might wear in a lockeroom. Or if I’m not mistaken about it being on this thread, have commented about what another might wear to walk the dog in, or about wearing to Sun Mass what someone might wear in their everyday life. There was even talk earlier about people should carry a change of clothing with them.

 

[catharina]

Tantum are you scandalized that the Church allows some countries to transfer holy feast days to Sun and others not?

What’s your connection?

 

[Tigg]

I think people do not realize that how you dress is a sign of respect not only for God, but for those around us. We owe each other a debt even if we do not understand that.

I agree with you, but we’re back to square one and from the tones of this thread, I don’t think we can expect any respect from others if they aren’t willing to give it to God. If hairy legs, sloppy jeans and flip flops are offensive to you in church, that’s considered your problem and a point the opponents are not willing to concede - their stand is that it doesn’t matter because God “looks only at the heart.” We’ve already had discussion as to how you cannot possibly separate the exterior from the faculty of the soul but that didn’t fly at all. So, the only way I can understand the opposite POV is to conclude that spiritual concepts (such as piety for and awe of God and the Divine Action of which we are **blessed **enough to partake) has to be taken out of the equation and replaced with the pop culture of the day. :bighanky:

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

I agree with you, but we’re back to square one and from the tones of this thread, I don’t think we can expect any respect from others if they aren’t willing to give it to God. If hairy legs, sloppy jeans and flip flops are offensive to you in church, that’s considered your problem and a point the opponents are not willing to concede - their stand is that it doesn’t matter because God “looks only at the heart.” We’ve already had discussion as to how you cannot possibly separate the exterior from the faculty of the soul but that didn’t fly at all. So, the only way I can understand the opposite POV is to conclude that spiritual concepts (such as piety for and awe of God and the Divine Action of which we are blessed enough to partake) has to be taken out of the equation and replaced with the pop culture of the day. :bighanky:

Strawman #442 You can’t conclude that our POV is that we have taken piety, awe of God, or Divine action out of our POV anymore than I can conclude that you are only dressing up in pride and have no heart towards the manner. It’s a false assumption. Where the issue lies is in if I have a responsibility to you to wear what YOU think is appropriate…at times even beyond what some Church leaders say. There is some common standards (or should be) I agree…but I don’t think those that are wearing that type of stuff is even on this thread. For example, there are things I won’t be showing you in Mass such as butt cracks, excessive cleavage, or a shirt/short so high you can see:blush: But if I wear clean, dark, modest jeans to Mass…that does not mean the interior of my heart is any less different then yours. Who decides what is dressy enough? Do we have a hall/church monitor? Maybe that is the best I have…it’s certainly not what I’m walking the dog in or going grocery shopping in…it’s different and set apart.

 

[irishpatrick]

Thinking it thru I’m in the small minority then because I would not be outraged.

Yep, you’d be in a tiny minority, and rightfully so imo.

 

[irishpatrick]

I agree with you, but we’re back to square one and from the tones of this thread, I don’t think we can expect any respect from others if they aren’t willing to give it to God. If hairy legs, sloppy jeans and flip flops are offensive to you in church, that’s considered your problem and a point the opponents are not willing to concede - their stand is that it doesn’t matter because God “looks only at the heart.” We’ve already had discussion as to how you cannot possibly separate the exterior from the faculty of the soul but that didn’t fly at all. So, the only way I can understand the opposite POV is to conclude that spiritual concepts (such as piety for and awe of God and the Divine Action of which we are blessed enough to partake) has to be taken out of the equation and replaced with the pop culture of the day. :bighanky:

I agree, but I would counter with another challenge: how would those same people feel if their invited guests showed-up at their daughter’s wedding wearing shorts and a t-shirt?

 

[irishpatrick]

Well, I wouldn’t be either. Fr.'s clothes right now sometimes are kind of wrinkled and his shoes could use a good polish…but I just smile because I have no issues about where his heart is. I understand that he is rushing here and there and everywhere else. It’s someone else who washes his vestments and presses them. And, scandal amongst scandal, on All Saints day last year I saw that he was wearing jeans under his vestments…I kind of chuckled…why…well because it was a Monday…which would be his only day off…and I know that he gave up that time to come and say Mass for us. That action showed where his heart was a lot more than his jeans.

So, a father and mother pay for their daughter’s wedding reception and for everything at the Church as well. Many of the invited guests arrive wearing shorts and t-shirts. Is that a sign of disrepect, or is it just fine because the father and mother can’t read the hearts of the invited guests?

 

[irishpatrick]

Strawman #442 You can’t conclude that our POV is that we have taken piety, awe of God, or Divine action out of our POV anymore than I can conclude that you are only dressing up in pride and have no heart towards the manner. It’s a false assumption. Where the issue lies is in if I have a responsibility to you to wear what YOU think is appropriate…at times even beyond what some Church leaders say. There is some common standards (or should be) I agree…but I don’t think those that are wearing that type of stuff is even on this thread. For example, there are things I won’t be showing you in Mass such as butt cracks, excessive cleavage, or a shirt/short so high you can see:blush: But if I wear clean, dark, modest jeans to Mass…that does not mean the interior of my heart is any less different then yours. Who decides what is dressy enough? Do we have a hall/church monitor? Maybe that is the best I have…it’s certainly not what I’m walking the dog in or going grocery shopping in…it’s different and set apart.

No one can read hearts, only God. This is not about devotion to God. It is about displaying proper external respect for others and for God while in public worship. The Mass is the Holiest form of prayer humans have–it is also a place in which God Himself comes to us–we show no example of respect for that awesome gift (especially to children around us) if we take little care as to how we look or what we wear.

 

[irishpatrick]

I feel it is important to recall that as Catholics, we do many things externally that represent our inner spiritual realities.

For example, we do the sign of the cross before praying, and presumably most here do that before meals and during all other times of prayer.

For example, on Ash Wednesday we walk through our lives carrying ashes on our heads.

There are many more–the point is, external signs are important, and how we dress does make a difference. We are called to be witnesses to everyone around us, and to not hide the faith (we place the lamp on the lampstand for all to see). We are called to build-up those around us–in the faith. We are called to be set apart from the world and to act and live differently than those around us regarding our faith.

When we walk into Mass wearing the same clothing we would to the beach, or to a ball game, what does that say to those around us? What is our external sign in that?

I know of no person who has a problem recognizing a Priest when he is wearing his Priestly blacks clothes and white collar. That is an external sign of his Priesthood and it is a powerful witness to the world.

When Nuns stopped wearing habits, they stopped providing an external witness to Christ because no one could see that they were Nuns.

When Catholic school children wear uniforms, they are being witnesses to the faith even though they do not realize that most of the time. People see those kids, and most often know they are Catholics, or at least Christians of some sort.

Our Churches are filled with external signs. We wear scapulars, and carry rosaries (sometimes on our car mirrors), we wear Saint pins and chains. We carry Bibles and Catechisms. What we present to the world, in terms of visible evidence of our faith, does matter.

 

[Elizabeth502]

^ Outstanding post, #423.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Yes, one of the beauties of the Faith is that it is externally as well as internally shown. We have ‘smells and bells’, we have all sorts of visual aids, tactile aids; we are not a barren or monochromatic faith because God is not a barren or monochromatic God.

But we are also living in a time when society itself has become gravely confused and astray in so many areas. (Those of us over 50 really can witness to this. NO I am NOT saying everything prior to 1960 was hearts and roses and clean and perfect. It wasn’t. I AM saying though that while there were great gains made in several areas from the 60s on, those gains are beginning to be offset by the greater losses. Because many of the gains themselves have been highjacked or taken too far or twisted into directions they were not intended to go, whereas the losses have been replaced by things far inferior.)

People will bring up the race question. No question that black people were and often still are discriminated against. But this was already being addressed PRIOR to the 1960s by people of good will and character, and even such people as Bill Cosby have addressed the unforeseen side ‘effect’ of things like affirmative action and ‘black power’ to blacks today --the tremendously high rate of unwed mothers, instead of building strong black families, women often received ‘more’ financial help if they WEREN’T married, while men were encouraged to make THEIR mark on the world by being ‘studs’ and ‘warriors’. . .with women seen as objects and with the ‘contraceptive and abortion’ mindset of society, not just objects but LEECHES out to ‘snare’ and ‘trap’ a stud with babies (which SHE had better be responsible for while he has better things to brew. . .I mean, do). . .

Or the women’s equality (which again was being addressed long before the 1960s). My own mother due to my father’s early death was out in the work force leaving her two tween-agers to be ‘latch key’ children in the late 1960s. . .and all the women who thought they could ‘have it all’ often wound up burnt out, forced to be everything to everyone, blamed by their entitlement princes and princesses (children) who were given every possible luxury their parents could ill afford and treated like pals. Again, not every woman would rather spend the majority of her salary on day care for her own children while she goes off to the wide world to ask “Do you want fries with that”, or to work long hours on an assembly line. Even the rare more affluent lawyer or physician often rues her career rise when her children wind up in juvie hall because while mommy and daddy were moving up the corporate ladder, Buffy and Junior were left to themselves, and went looking for whatever they could find to either dull their pain (drugs), give them love (bad companions, pimps, teen age sex partners), or help them feel ANYTHING other than boredom and ennui from having lots of THINGS but no real parenting (risky behaviors, stealing, rape and even murder).

We in this current time do not do well looking to CULTURE or SOCIETY to justify our desires and our interpretations especially when it comes to religion. . .because the current culture/society is sick, diseased, and twisted in many, many ways. Rather we should be looking to our Church and its great traditions to help us find our way out of the pitfalls of ‘the world, the flesh, and the devil’.

I think it was C.S. Lewis who once said that often going backward was the most progressive thing a person could do. Because suppose a person steps off the main road and gets onto a ‘short cut’ path. For a while, the path follows the direction of the road and then it turns. . .and often it winds up leading not to a farther place along the road, but abruptly into a dead end, or it runs into thickets and tangles, cliff edges, rocky rapids. . .sure, if you get through all the dangers of the quicksand etc. you MIGHTwind up back at the road (you can’t be sure), but you might wind up dead.

So the SMART, the most progressive way, to be sure of getting to the end of the road is to go BACKWARD on that misleading path until you get back to the road where you left it. . .and then take the ROAD in safety. Going ‘back’ is the way to reach the end without fail.

 

[CMatt25]

Strawman #442 You can’t conclude that our POV is that we have taken piety, awe of God, or Divine action out of our POV anymore than I can conclude that you are only dressing up in pride and have no heart towards the manner. It’s a false assumption. Where the issue lies is in if I have a responsibility to you to wear what YOU think is appropriate…at times even beyond what some Church leaders say. There is some common standards (or should be) I agree…but I don’t think those that are wearing that type of stuff is even on this thread. For example, there are things I won’t be showing you in Mass such as butt cracks, excessive cleavage, or a shirt/short so high you can see:blush: But if I wear clean, dark, modest jeans to Mass…that does not mean the interior of my heart is any less different then yours. Who decides what is dressy enough? Do we have a hall/church monitor? Maybe that is the best I have…it’s certainly not what I’m walking the dog in or going grocery shopping in…it’s different and set apart.

Wow we’re up to 442 already. Correct none of that stuff, cracks or excess cleavage is on the thread. And true. You in your jeans, ABM, and you said your husband wears shorts, and for neither of you does it mean your hearts are more nor less than the others here who dress dressier so to speak. But now it sounds like you must wear what one of them considers appropriately respectful towards them. As you said sometimes beyond what some Church leaders say. Well said. God bless and peace.

 

[ryecroft]

Maybe some of those that aren’t in suits and dresses are comfortable with their clothes- as my dad says he should feel comfortable in “his Father’s House” (isn’t this what Church is after all?)-
Perhaps those commenting on the fashion parade in Church each week should listen more closely to what’s being said - if I remember correctly, there’s something about

"You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye."Matt 7.5

If you have nothing better to do in Church each Sunday than comment on what others wear then perhaps you need to reevaluate your prayer lives and you’re going to Church… Take care of you and your own families and we’ll take care of ours.

God Bless
Rye

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Maybe some of those that aren’t in suits and dresses are comfortable with their clothes- as my dad says he should feel comfortable in “his Father’s House” (isn’t this what Church is after all?)- You DO know that God is not ‘just’ Father but LORD ALMIGHTY, right?
Perhaps those commenting on the fashion parade in Church each week should listen more closely to what’s being said - if I remember correctly, there’s something about

"You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye."Matt 7.5

If you have nothing better to do in Church each Sunday than comment on what others wear then perhaps you need to reevaluate your prayer lives and you’re going to Church… Take care of you and your own families and we’ll take care of ours.

God Bless
Rye

Perhaps it is time that some people remember that the original title and post of this thread was CHURCH LEADERS --that is LEADERS, not just 'church goers" BLUSH at 'casual Catholic attire.

This is not simply about so-called hypocrite fashion police ramming their ideas down the POOR POOR downtrodden and totally RIGHTEOUS people who only want to wear what’s comfortable. . .

This is about your Church’s leaders (you know, the people with AUTHORITY to whom as Catholics you owe OBEDIENCE) noting that SOME people have gone TOO FAR from appropriate attire for Mass and have lost a necessary understanding of the SACRED SPACE which should be CORRECTED.

Nobody is complaining about people wearing modest decent clothing. While in time with great effort society might go back on track where people want to do more than the current ‘minimum daily effort’ for God, and urge it for those who are READY to do so, if currently people are modest and decent then FINE.

It is the immodest and indecent who have ‘pushed the line’ and have attempted to completely remove the SACRED ASPECT of Church and have it seen ONLY as 'God’s man cave" which the church LEADERS are attempting to address. . .and they have the right and the obligation to do so.

 

[irishpatrick]

Maybe some of those that aren’t in suits and dresses are comfortable with their clothes- as my dad says he should feel comfortable in “his Father’s House” (isn’t this what Church is after all?)-
Perhaps those commenting on the fashion parade in Church each week should listen more closely to what’s being said - if I remember correctly, there’s something about

"You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye."Matt 7.5

If you have nothing better to do in Church each Sunday than comment on what others wear then perhaps you need to reevaluate your prayer lives and you’re going to Church… Take care of you and your own families and we’ll take care of ours.

God Bless
Rye

I see no one–including me–who states they go to Mass looking at how others are dressed. Sometimes, it is simply difficult NOT to notice. However, it is impossible for any of us to read the hearts or lives of those around us, so those people might very well have a good reason to dress as they do. It is between them and God.

However, this is a discussion about what is generally correct for Mass–it is not a condemnation or judgment placed on any one person. There is NOTHING wrong wth discussing what is generally appropriate and I have not seen anyone here who claims wearing certain clothing is a sin.

This is no different than any other conversation we might have regarding the faith. I think people have lost the ability to generalize (a very sad loss).

BTW, I have not seen even one person on this thread state that suits and dresses should be worn.

 

[catharina]

Perhaps it is time that some people remember that the original title and post of this thread was CHURCH LEADERS --that is LEADERS, not just 'church goers" BLUSH at 'casual Catholic attire.

This is not simply about so-called hypocrite fashion police ramming their ideas down the POOR POOR downtrodden and totally RIGHTEOUS people who only want to wear what’s comfortable. . .

This is about your Church’s leaders (you know, the people with AUTHORITY to whom as Catholics you owe OBEDIENCE) noting that SOME people have gone TOO FAR from appropriate attire for Mass and have lost a necessary understanding of the SACRED SPACE which should be CORRECTED.

Nobody is complaining about people wearing modest decent clothing. While in time with great effort society might go back on track where people want to do more than the current ‘minimum daily effort’ for God, and urge it for those who are READY to do so, if currently people are modest and decent then FINE.

It is the immodest and indecent who have ‘pushed the line’ and have attempted to completely remove the SACRED ASPECT of Church and have it seen ONLY as 'God’s man cave" which the church LEADERS are attempting to address. . .and they have the right and the obligation to do so.

You took the words right out of my mouth. Thanks.

 

[catharina]

I see no one–including me–who states they go to Mass looking at how others are dressed. Sometimes, it is simply difficult NOT to notice. However, it is impossible for any of us to read the hearts or lives of those around us, so those people might very well have a good reason to dress as they do. It is between them and God.

However, this is a discussion about what is generally correct for Mass–it is not a condemnation or judgment placed on any one person. There is NOTHING wrong wth discussing what is generally appropriate and I have not seen anyone here who claims wearing certain clothing is a sin.

This is no different than any other conversation we might have regarding the faith. I think people have lost the ability to generalize (a very sad loss).

BTW, I have not seen even one person on this thread state that suits and dresses should be worn.

You also took the words right out of my mouth. Thanks also to you.

 

[MissRose73]

Once they start making such man made rules about dressing up, who’s to say some priest won’t require a dress or skirt and won’t allow your mother in with her pants and top? Btw my mother was the same way especially in her later yrs. Instead of dresses and skirts, she wore nice capris, a nice top, and sneakers.

My mother would make her views well known if she was told that she must wear a dress or skirt to Mass as she tends to speak up more. But she grew up in a time up to til a few years before i was born that she was required to always wear dresses or skirts for church, and she disliked that a great deal.

 

[oneplustwo]

"You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye."Matt 7.5

Yes, but there is also:

“One person believes that one may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. The one who eats must not despise the one who abstains, and the one who abstains must not pass judgment on the one who eats; for God has welcomed him.” Romans 14:2-3

and

“If your brother is being hurt by what you eat, your conduct is no longer in accord with love. Do not because of your food destroy him for whom Christ died” Romans 14:15

If someone in church will be offended by me not dressing well enough, wouldn’t you agree this means we should be conscientious of this and dress so as to not offend?